MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417247784 · doi:10.1016/j.puhip.2025.100696

A short version of the post-COVID-19 condition stigma questionnaire

2025· article· en· W4417247784 on OpenAlexafffund
Liam Rourke, Ronald W. Damant

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health in Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaVancouver Biotech (Canada)
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsStigma (botany)Reliability (semiconductor)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Data collection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to develop a short version of the 40-item Post-COVID-19 Condition Stigma Questionnaire (PCCSQ) while preserving its factor structure, reliability, and validity. The PCCSQ is a sound tool for assessing the discrimination experienced by people with a diagnosis of long covid, but a shorter version would be less demanding of respondents experiencing fatigue and brain fog and easier for clinicians and researchers to administer. Study design: This was an observational study. Methods: , we assembled 12 items that represented the factors and discriminated among participants with high and low levels of stigma. We administered the shorter questionnaire to 99 long covid patients and assessed several of its measurement properties. Results: The 12-item instrument maintains the 6-factor structure of long covid stigma, has a mean discrimination index of 0.40 (sd = 0.08; range 0.22-0.48), an internal consistency of α = 0.89, a split-half reliability of 0.86, and it correlates predictably with theoretically-related variables. Conclusions: The PCCSQ-12 is a feasible, reliable and valid means of assessing patients' experience of long covid stigma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 venuePublic Health in PracticeSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207