Cultural Adaptation, Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of Canadian Occupational Performance Measure in Children With Cerebral Palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to its complex nature, cerebral palsy (CP) leads to impairments in body structure and functions, decreased participation and affected occupational performance. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) is commonly used with both children diagnosed with CP and their parents, but it has not been culturally adapted in this population. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties (validity and reliability) of the COPM when used directly with children with CP. A secondary aim involved translating the specific administration instructions into Turkish to facilitate child self-report. METHODS: All analyses conducted to examine validity and reliability were performed using the COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) guideline. The scale and instructions were translated following Beaton's procedure. RESULTS: The discriminative construct validity analysis revealed no significant gender-based differences in COPM performance and satisfaction scores (p = 0.75, p = 0.11), indicating consistency across genders. Item analysis showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.76-0.81). Test-retest analysis demonstrated excellent reliability for time-related equability in COPM performance and satisfaction parameters (ICC > 0.9). CONCLUSION: The COPM is a valid and reliable measurement tool for children aged 8-18 with CP, with adapted instruction in Turkish.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".