MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validation of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) in the Ukrainian language

2025· article· en· W4409364119 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Olya Mangusheva, Олена Лазарєва, Anette Enemark Larsen

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicni perspektivi · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicErgonomics and Human Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianAdaptation (eye)Measure (data warehouse)Translation (biology)Content (measure theory)LinguisticsPsychologyComputer scienceNatural language processingBiologyNeuroscienceMathematicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aimed at generating an evidence-informed, culturally adapted and valid translation of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) into the Ukrainian language. Due to increased need for rehabilitation of military personnel during the ongoing war, the secondary purpose of the study was to investigate the feasibility of using the COPM with military servicemen and veterans. The translation procedure followed established guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of outcome measures with an addition of a Committee Approach to ensure alignment of the translation with the emerging professional terminology in Ukrainian. During pre-testing and field testing, the newly translated Ukrainian version of the COPM was used with 84 occupational therapy clients, 51% of whom were military servicemen and 49% representing general population. Content validity was assessed using Content Validity Index (CVI) with feedback from 20 occupational therapists and 84 clients from six regions of Ukraine through anonymous surveys developed in adherence with the COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures. As a result, the CVI calculated from anonymous responses of clients of occupational therapy ranged from 0.89 to 0.99 on items associated with relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility of the outcome measure. CVI calculated from responses of occupational therapists was 1.0 for all categories, indicating outstanding content validity. Both occupational therapists and clients of occupational therapy reported the perceived positive impact of the COPM on client-centeredness and occupational focus of occupational therapy services. The new Ukrainian translation of the COPM demonstrated sufficient cultural equivalence, and content validity, making it a valid tool for client-centered and occupation focused occupational therapy practice with both the civilian population and military servicemen. The study describes the first translation and validation of an occupational therapy outcome measure in Ukrainian, contributs to the development of rehabilitation and occupational therapy terminology and the development of occupational therapy in Ukraine. Future studies are necessary for continued psychometric testing of the Ukrainian translation of the COPM with military personnel as well as the general 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 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)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicni perspektiviSame topicErgonomics and Human FactorsFrench-language works237,207