Co-Developing and Validating the I-SPARX Wellness Questionnaire: A Community-Driven Psychometric Study with Inuit Youth in Nunavut
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inuit youth in Nunavut demonstrate resilience despite enduring inequities and unmet mental health needs shaped by colonial legacies. As Inuit communities prioritize youth mental wellness, actively engaging young people in research and developing culturally relevant assessment tools is critical. This study describes the collaborative process of designing an Inuit-specific well-being survey, the [Questionnaire name blinded], and examines its psychometric properties. Eighteen Inuit youth council members and eight adult community members from five communities in Nunavut worked with a university-based research team to identify wellness themes essential for an outcome measure evaluating an online psychoeducational intervention. This collaboration resulted in a 39-item measure assessing the effectiveness of the [Intervention name blinded] serious game in supporting Inuit youth mental wellness. Data from 117 Inuit youth, ages 12 to 24, across Nunavut, were analyzed to assess the measure’s reliability and factor structure. Results indicate strong psychometric properties, with high internal consistency and a three-factor model reflecting hope for the future, cognitive-behavioural strategies, and distress regulation. The [Questionnaire name blinded], co-developed with Inuit youth, offers a culturally relevant, psychometrically sound tool for assessing mental wellness. This measure holds promise for future evaluations of cognitive-behavioural interventions and psychoeducational e-resources aimed at fostering the well-being of Inuit youth.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".