MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Validation of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory-4 (MPAI-4) and reference norms in a French-Canadian population with traumatic brain injury receiving rehabilitation

2021· article· en· W6920666531 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationTraumatic brain injuryPopulationPsychological interventionReliability (semiconductor)Exploratory factor analysisPsychometricsConfirmatory factor analysisPoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Validate the factor structure and establish internal consistency reliability of the French-Canadian version of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory (MPAI-4), using a Canadian sample of adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI) receiving post-acute rehabilitation services. Psychometric analysis of French-Canadian MPAI-4 data from TBI adults (N = 1012) who received rehabilitation interventions and for whom a first French-Canadian MPAI-4 measure was completed between 2016 and 2020. Exploratory factor analysis was used to evaluate the factor structure of the French-Canadian MPAI-4. The final and best solution revealed three factors, which accounted for 48.68% of the variance. Using Cronbach’s alpha, all subscales showed good internal consistency (all 0.70 ≤ α ≤ 0.89). Reference norms for the TBI sample are provided, as well as descriptive raw data according to sex, age, TBI severity and rehabilitation setting. The French-Canadian MPAI-4 factor structure is validated. The three factors extracted are similar to the three subscales of the original MPAI-4. The questionnaire shows good psychometric properties and represents a suitable tool for TBI adults receiving rehabilitation services in a French-Canadian context. The provided reference norms will also help guide the clinical use of the MPAI-4 in French-Canadian TBI populations.Implications for rehabilitationThe MPAI-4 questionnaire measures functional abilities, global outcome and community integration following traumatic brain injury (TBI).The questionnaire can be used in inpatient, outpatient and vocational rehabilitation settings to assess TBI patients’ progress and outcomes, plan interventions and evaluate the effect of rehabilitation.The French-Canadian version of the MPAI-4 is validated and suitable to be used in French-Canadian post-acute TBI rehabilitation settings. The MPAI-4 questionnaire measures functional abilities, global outcome and community integration following traumatic brain injury (TBI). The questionnaire can be used in inpatient, outpatient and vocational rehabilitation settings to assess TBI patients’ progress and outcomes, plan interventions and evaluate the effect of rehabilitation. The French-Canadian version of the MPAI-4 is validated and suitable to be used in French-Canadian post-acute TBI rehabilitation settings.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→