The parent empowerment scale: Development and psychometric properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Parents of trans and gender diverse (herein ‘trans’) children experience additional challenges in their parenting role relative to parents of cisgender children. Understanding and enhancing parents’ empowerment is a promising approach to support both parents and children. We aimed to develop an empowerment scale specific to parents of trans children, grounded in parents’ lived experiences.Methods Based on a previous qualitative investigation of empowerment in parents of trans children, 32 items were created and iteratively reviewed by a parent advisory group to ensure understanding, respectfulness, and comprehensiveness. Parents and caregivers of trans children 5–17 years old living in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom completed the scale (N = 270), as well as additional measures of parenting self-efficacy (Me as a Parent Scale – Short Form) and parent self-esteem (Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale), to assess the scale’s validity.Results Exploratory factor analysis showed a five-factor solution consisting of Acceptance and Inclusion (α = .91), Supportive Health Services (α = .95), Organizations Support the Child (α = .65), School Supports the Parents (α = .93) and Parent Supports and Advocates for their Child (α = .81). The final 22 item Parent Empowerment Scale (PES) demonstrated convergent, concurrent, and incremental validity.Conclusion This Parent Empowerment Scale is a novel measure grounded in lived experience that can be used in both clinical and research contexts to understand, assess and promote empowerment in parents of trans children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".