MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394073381 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.5668363

Brazilian transcultural adaptation of an instrument on communicative strategies of caregivers of elderly with dementia

2017· dataset· en· W4394073381 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lais Lopes Delfino, Ricardo Shoiti Komatsu, Caroline Komatsu, Anita Liberalesso Néri, Meire Cachioni

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2017
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Racism, and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)DementiaPsychologyCognitive psychologyMedicineNeuroscienceDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Communication with patients with dementia may be a difficult task for caregivers. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to produce a Brazilian transcultural adaptation of an instrument developed in Canada, called the Small Communication Strategies Scale, composed of 10 items constructed from 10 communicative strategies most recurrent in a literature survey. METHODS: Drawing on understanding of the construction of the Small Communication Strategies Scale (SCSS), a Brazilian Portuguese version of the instrument was devised through the following steps: translation, back-translation and semantic-cultural adaptation by a specialized linguist in English-Portuguese translations and application of the comprehension test for the version produced in a group of caregivers of elderly individuals with dementia. RESULTS: The transcultural equivalence process was performed and two items of the SCSS needed adapting to the Brazilian context. After changes suggested by a specialized linguist, the final version was applied to 34 caregivers and the transcultural equivalence considered satisfactory. CONCLUSION: The Brazilian version of the instrument was successfully transculturally adapted for future validation and application in Brazil.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicMigration, Racism, and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207