MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210796664 · doi:10.34172/aim.2022.01

Reliability and Validation of the Persian Version of JUICE Study Questionnaire

2022· article· en· W4210796664 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Rayatpisheh, Saba Nasseri-Moghaddam, Afsoon Kherad, Takeshi Kanno, Ali Reza Sima, Paul Moayyedi, Siavosh Nasseri‐Moghaddam

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Iranian Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersianAnxietyReliability (semiconductor)MedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Content validityInterviewPsychologyTest (biology)ValidityClinical psychologyHospital Anxiety and Depression ScalePhysical therapyFamily medicinePsychometricsPsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study is part of a prospective international cohort study on the composition of microbiota living in the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract and its correlations to the patients' symptoms, and their psychological and physical health status in three different populations (JUICE Study). Our study evaluates the reliability and validity of the Persian version of a three-part questionnaire which will be used in this study. METHODS: The original English version of the questionnaire was translated to Farsi and then back translated to English by an expert Iranian English teacher. The back-translation was edited by a native English speaker and then retranslated to Farsi. The questionnaire consists of three parts; the first part includes demographic data, the second part is the EQ-5D questionnaire which is an instrument developed by the EuroQol group to measure five dimensions of quality of life and health status, and the third part is the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire (HADS). By convenience sampling, 22 participants were enrolled. To check reliability, they were asked to complete the questionnaire and repeat this two weeks later. For validity, one of the researchers completed the questionnaire for each of the participants after interviewing them and this was compared with the questionnaire completed by the participant. Each participant was also asked to comment on the content and structure of the questionnaire and these points were considered for improvement of the questionnaire. RESULTS: questions, respectively. In the second part, i.e. the EQ5D questionnaire, percentage agreements of the first and second items for reliability equaled 1. Percentage agreements of the three last items were 0.90, 0.63 and 0.72, respectively. Validity of the EQ5D questionnaire was 100% for the first three items and 95% for the last one. For the HADS questionnaire, percentage agreement averaged 0.63 in the reliability phase and 0.78 in the validation phase. CONCLUSION: According to our data, this three-part questionnaire has acceptable reliability and validity to be used as an instrument in Farsi-speaking populations for the JUICE study.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Iranian MedicineSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207