Portuguese translation and validation of the questionnaires from the Canadian Physical Literacy Assessment-2: a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/objective Physical literacy assessment is considered a vital resource to decrease the prevalence of sedentary lifestyles and physical inactivity in children and adolescents worldwide. In Portugal, there is no physical literacy assessment tool for children under 15 years old. The main objective of this study was to carry out a translation and cultural adaptation of the Canadian Physical Literacy Assessment 2 (CAPL-2) into Portuguese, as well as to test its psychometric properties, in children between 8 and 12 years of age. Methods The questionnaires included in the CAPL-2 were translated using the translation-back-translation method and adapted to their context. The test–retest reliability, internal consistency, and confirmatory factor analysis of the CAPL-2 Portuguese version were analyzed in a sample of 69 and 138 students, respectively, from a school in the Alentejo region (Portugal). Results The Portuguese version of the CAPL-2 questionnaires demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α: 0.713–0.979) and test–retest reliability ranging from moderate to nearly perfect in the motivation and confidence domain and knowledge and comprehension domain (ICC = 0.549–0.932). The results showed a good fit after adjusting for covariation paths (CMIN/DF = 1.382, p = 0.105, RMSEA = 0.053, CFI = 0.971, TLI = 0.955, NFI = 0.907). Conclusion The CAPL-2 version of the questionnaires, translated and adapted to the Portuguese context, demonstrated validity and reliability, making them suitable for assessing physical literacy in children aged 8–12 years.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".