MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407622744 · doi:10.3390/ijerph22020297

Validation of the Canadian English and French Versions of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale in Quebec Nursing Staff

2025· article· en· W4407622744 on OpenAlexaffabout
Céline Gélinas, Marc‐André Maheu‐Cadotte, Élisabeth Di Nardo, Mélanie Lavoie‐Tremblay, Maria Cecília Bueno Jayme Gallani, Émilie Gosselin, Christine Maheu, Sylvie Lambert, Mélissa Richard-Lalonde, Éric Tchouaket Nguemeleu, José Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisSt Mary's Hospital CentreMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalUniversité LavalUniversité de SherbrookeCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaAnxietyContext (archaeology)Exploratory factor analysisPandemicClinical psychologyScale (ratio)MedicineTraumatic stressCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyNursingPsychiatryPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nursing staff have been at the forefront of the pandemic, reporting high traumatic stress and anxiety levels related to high fear of COVID-19. Recommendations from previous studies include using the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) as a screening tool to identify any individuals who may benefit from targeted psychological support. Thus far, the accuracy of the Canadian English and French versions of FCV-19S to detect high levels of traumatic stress and anxiety symptoms has not been examined. The objectives of this methodological psychometric study were to examine among nursing staff: (a) the structure and internal consistency of the Canadian versions of the FCV-19S and (b) its ability in detecting high levels of traumatic stress and anxiety symptoms. An anonymous online survey was distributed among nursing staff (n = 387) in the province of Quebec (Canada). This survey included the FCV-19S and scales measuring their traumatic stress (PCL-5) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-7). Exploratory factor analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed. The one-factor structure of the FCV-19S was supported (Cronbach alpha = 0.87). The FCV-19S showed better accuracy for the detection of traumatic stress (area under the curve (AUC) 0.75 [95% CI 0.68, 0.82]) in comparison to anxiety symptoms (AUC 0.65 [95% CI 0.60, 0.74]). The FCV-19S may benefit from adaptation for its use in nursing staff and in a future pandemic context.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→