Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Pain Attitudes Questionnaire - revised into Brazilian Portuguese in patients with chronic cancer pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo translate, culturally adapt, and validate the Pain Attitudes Questionnaire - Revised (PAQ-R) into Brazilian Portuguese for patients with chronic cancer pain.DesignQuestionnaire validation study.SettingMaranhão Oncology Hospital and Aldenora Bello Hospital (São Luís, Maranhão, Northeast Brazil).Participants165 patients with chronic cancer pain, of both sexes, aged 18 years or older.Main MeasuresThe Barthel Index, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) were used for clinimetric evaluation. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) was used to characterize the sample. The measurement properties evaluated in this study included cross-cultural validity, structural validity, construct validity, reliability, and internal consistency.ResultsThe study included 165 cancer patients. The internal structure of the PAQ-R, consisting of five domains and 23 items, was adequate (comparative fit index = 0.95, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.94, root mean square error of approximation = 0.08, chi-square/degrees of freedom = 2.04). Test-retest reliability was satisfactory (ICC = 0.82 to 0.89), as was internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.70 to 0.94). Expected correlation magnitudes (rho ≤ 0.384, p < 0.05) were observed between all PAQ-R domains and functional independence, between the stoic-fortitude domain and depression, and between catastrophizing and the stoic-fortitude, stoic-superiority, and cautious-self-doubt domains of the PAQ-R.ConclusionThe Brazilian Portuguese version of the PAQ-R, with five domains and 23 items, demonstrated adequate construct validity, reliability, and internal consistency for use in patients with chronic cancer pain.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".