Translation and psychometric evaluation of the Alberta Continuity of Services Scale for Mental Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: The continuity of care and attention is considered as a process that involves an orderly attention, an uninterrupted movement of people among several elements of the system of provision of services. It does not exist enough evidence in terms of measurement instruments of this continuity in Latin America. Even globally it has been conceptualized that this matter has been abandoned repeatedly by the research teams, possibly due to the shortage of validated multidimensional measures and to the lack of studies designed to approach the inherent complexities of the service. Objective: describe the process of translation, cultural adaptation to Colombia, as well as the internal consistency and construct validity of the Alberta Continuity of Services Scale for Mental Health (ACSS-MH). Methods: This instrument was subdued to the evaluation of validity of the content by experts and this was applied to a rural population in a Colombian context. Were performed tests of internal consistency and construct validity for each of the parts of the scale. Results: Under the consensus of the expert, it is made changes on some items, looking for a better adaptability of the instrument to the linguistic characteristics of Spanish, without losing sight of the evaluation objective of each one of the items on the original questionnaire. The result of the analysis of part A converged in 5 components that explain the 69.69% of the variance with 24 Items; Similarly, the analysis of part B grouped 13 items into four components, which explain the 72.02% of the variance. Discussion: This scale could be implemented to improve the provision of mental health services in Latin American contexts, where continuity of care has presented significant difficulties.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".