Initial psychometric properties of the medical outcomes study social support survey in caregivers of individuals with intellectual disabilities in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the initial evidence of internal structure and convergent validity of the Brazilian version of the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (MOS-SSS) in caregivers of individuals with intellectual disabilities. This study included 185 caregivers of individuals with disabilities who were users of a non-governmental organization in southeastern Brazil. We performed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, internal consistency reliability, and predictive validity analyses. Our results demonstrated a one-dimensional internal structure for the adapted scale, consisting of nineteen items and presenting good precision coefficients (α = 0.96 and ω = 0.96) and composite reliability (0.96). Also, the MOS-SSS showed convergent validity with the Family APGAR Scale and the family support and self-control factors of the Informal Caregiver Burden Assessment Questionnaire-Short Version. These findings suggest that the Brazilian version of the MOS-SSS has adequate psychometric properties and can be used in this context and population.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".