Les propriétés psychométriques de la version francophone du Child Feeding Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The Child feeding questionnaire is a tool that measures parent’s perception, attitudes, and preoccupation in regards of their child’s weight. Context: Even if this tool has been used for more than 20 years and has been translated in eight languages, there isn’t a known French version. Objectif: The aim of this methodological research was to translate in French and to test its validity and reliability. Method: Reverse translation produced a French version of Child feeding questionnaire which was sent to 455 French speaking parents of children aged five to ten years old. Instrument validity and fidelity were tested using the following analysis: factor analysis, the internal consistency, the descriptive analysis, and the Pearson correlation. Results: A total of 136 questionnaires were analysed. Factor analysis revealed nine major factors with a significant internal consistency. Discussion: Like other research findings, results from this study showed that parents underestimate their children’s weight and have few concerns regarding their condition. Conclusion: Results confirm the preliminary psychometric properties of the French translated Child feeding questionnaire.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".