MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310035881 · doi:10.1111/cch.13086

Systematic review of the psychometric properties of cultural adaptations and translations of the <scp>Children's Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment</scp> (CAPE)

2022· review· en· W4310035881 on OpenAlexaff
Manel Abid, Isabelle Demers, Catherine Mercier, Désirée B. Maltais

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversité LavalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOMEDLINECritical appraisalInclusion (mineral)PsychologyAdaptation (eye)Medical educationApplied psychologyPsychometricsClinical psychologyMedicineSocial psychologyAlternative medicinePsychological interventionPathologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Children's Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment (CAPE) is the most widely used questionnaire for the assessment of children participation. While several cultural adaptations and translations exist, the quality of the methods used to produce them, as well as their psychometric properties, remains unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the different translated and/or culturally adapted versions of the CAPE for children and youth with and without disabilities. METHOD: A search was performed in five electronic databases CINAHL (EBSCO), MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (ELSEVIER), PSYCINFO (OVID), and WEB OF SCIENCE Core Collection (CLARIVATE), for articles available in French or English with the last update in July 2022. All studies related to a cultural adaptation and/or translation of the CAPE were retained and evaluated based on established guidelines for cross-cultural adaptations and measurement properties. The extraction was done independently by two authors. A critical appraisal of translation and psychometric properties methods was performed. Critical appraisal of the articles was done using the Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures tool and the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology. RESULTS: The search identified 642 studies (321 duplicates removed), 16 of which underwent full-text review. Nine studies met all inclusion criteria and underwent analysis. According to the recommended steps for cross-cultural adaptations, one study performed 100% of the steps and two others performed 80%. None of the studies met all the recommendations for the evaluation of psychometric properties. A full evaluation of reliability and internal consistency were reported by 74% of studies. None of the studies reported a full evaluation of responsiveness, agreement and/or construct validity. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrated limitations in the robustness of the methods used to develop and evaluate translated and culturally adapted versions of CAPE. To ensure valid and reliable results when conducting future research using the CAPE, it is recommended to fully evaluate the psychometric properties of the existing versions and to produce other translated and culturally adapted versions of the 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Care Health and DevelopmentSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207