Measuring autonomy and respect: A qualitative, cross-cultural adaptation of the Mothers Autonomy in decision making scale and mothers on respect index instruments in Danish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Decision-making is important in user-involved maternity care and patient experience instruments Mothers Autonomy in Decision Making scale (MADM) and Mothers on Respect index (MORi) are used internationally to measure the user involvement quality and users' experiences of autonomy and respect. This study aimed to translate and qualitatively adapt the original MADM and MORi instruments to the Danish language and culture. METHODS: A forward and backward translation using a standard guideline. Subsequently, qualitative interviews to refine the translation and cultural adaptation by pilot testing the scales. RESULTS: The translation process showed cultural differences linked to linguistic variations between Danish and English. Cognitive interviews with 14 diverse pregnant women revealed challenges in women's understanding of decision-making in maternity care. Changes in wording and assisting descriptive texts were made. Further, the order of the MADM items was changed to improve the understanding of decision-making. DISCUSSION: Primarily, the discussion concerns how decision-making can be understood in the context of maternity care and why women's understanding of decision-making in Danish maternity care in the MADM scale items was challenged. CONCLUSION: The qualitative pilot test using cognitive interviews after translation of the instruments was a valuable method for cultural adaptation providing important knowledge on women's understanding and perceptions of item contents. The cognitive interviews provided a comprehensive understanding of decision-making and contributed to a thoroughly worked Danish version of the MADM and MORi instruments.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".