Assessing the Validity and Reliability of a French Version of the Child Feeding Questionnaire among Black Mothers Living in Ottawa (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ) is a well-established tool used to assess parental beliefs, attitudes, and child feeding practices, with a focus on childhood obesity proneness. To date, there is no French version of the CFQ, nor any Canadian studies assessing its construct validity. The aim of this study was to assess the construct validity and the reliability of a French version of the CFQ among Black mothers (n = 136) of school-aged children living in Ottawa (Canada). The final best fitting model included 7 factors, 20 items, and 1 error covariance. This model was retained as the final model as it (1) excluded two items with very low factor loadings; (2) had the lowest χ2, AIC, BIC, RMSEA, and SRMR values; and (3) had CFI and TLI values ≥ 0.95. Internal consistency ranged from poor to good; the restriction subscale had the lowest internal consistency, followed by the perceived responsibility, pressure to eat, perceive child weight, concern about child weight, and monitoring scales, respectively. Our results showed that a seven-factor model with minor modifications was best fitted to the current data. Future studies are needed to test the validity and reliability of the CFQ in other population groups and among fathers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".