MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400654467 · doi:10.1016/j.clinsp.2024.100432

Translation to Portuguese and cross-cultural adaptation of the epilepsy transition readiness checklist for use in Brazil

2024· article· en· W4400654467 on OpenAlexaff
Daniela Fontes Bezerra, Rudá Alessi, Danielle M. Andrade, Rubens Wajnsztejn, Marco Akerman

Bibliographic record

VenueClinics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrazilian PortugueseCross-culturalPortugueseChecklistAdaptation (eye)Cross-cultural studiesPsychologyEpilepsyCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyLinguisticsSociologyAnthropologyPsychiatryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Planning for the child and adolescent to have a safe handling in the epilepsy transition process is essential. In this work, the authors translated the "Readiness Checklists" and applied them to a group of patients and their respective caregivers in the transition process to assess the possibility of using them as a monitoring and instructional instrument. METHODS: The "Readiness Checklists" were applied to thirty adolescents with epilepsy and their caregivers. The original English version of this instrument underwent a process of translation and cultural adaptation by a translator with knowledge of English and epilepsy. Subsequently, it was carried out the back-translation and the Portuguese version was compared to the original, analyzing discrepancies, thus obtaining the final version for the Brazilian population. RESULTS: = 0.837; p < 0.001). The application of the questionnaire by the health team was feasible for all interviewed patients and their respective caregivers. CONCLUSION: The translation and application of the "Readiness Checklists" is feasible in Portuguese. Patients with lower educational levels felt less prepared for the transition than patients with higher educational levels, independently of age. Adolescents and caregivers showed similar perceptions regarding patients' abilities. The lists can be very useful tools to assess and plan the follow-up of the population of patients with epilepsy in the process of transition.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinicsSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207