Reliability and validity of self-assessment of mouth opening: a validation study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Saund DS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3534492 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Reliability and validity of self-assessment of mouth opening: a validation study.
Saund Daniel Satnam Singh DS Pearson David D Dietrich Thomas T
BMC oral health 20121112
<h4>Background</h4>The objective of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility and validity of patients' mouth opening measurements in a research setting.<h4>Methods</h4>Firstly, 68 patients made repeated self-measurements of mouth opening using a cardboard scale (Therabite Range of Motion Scale - TRMS). Secondly, 80 patients enrolled in a clinical trial on morbidity after lower third molar surgery, made daily assessments during the postoperative week. Patients' measurements were then compar ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundFew assessment instruments have examined the nutrition and physical activity environments in child care, and none are self-administered. Given the emerging focus on child care settings as a target for intervention, a valid and reliable measure of the nutrition and physical activity environment is needed.MethodsTo measure inter-rater reliability, 59 child care center directors and 109 staff completed the self-assessment concurrently, but independently. Three weeks later, a repeat self-assessment was completed by a sub-sample of 38 directors to assess test-retest reliability. To assess criterion validity, a researcher-administered environmental assessment was conducted at 69 centers and was compared to a self-assessment completed by the director. A weighted kappa test statistic and percent agreement were calculated to assess agreement for each question on the self-assessment.ResultsFor inter-rater reliability, kappa statistics ranged from 0.20 to 1.00 across all questions. Test-retest reliability of the self-assessment yielded kappa statistics that ranged from 0.07 to 1.00. The inter-quartile kappa statistic ranges for inter-rater and test-retest reliability were 0.45 to 0.63 and 0.27 to 0.45, respectively. When percent agreement was calculated, questions ranged from 52.6% to 100% for inter-rater reliability and 34.3% to 100% for test-retest reliability. Kappa statistics for validity ranged from -0.01 to 0.79, with an inter-quartile range of 0.08 to 0.34. Percent agreement for validity ranged from 12.9% to 93.7%.ConclusionThis study provides estimates of criterion validity, inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability for an environmental nutrition and physical activity self-assessment instrument for child care. Results indicate that the self-assessment is a stable and reasonably accurate instrument for use with child care interventions. We therefore recommend the Nutrition and Physical Activity Self-Assessment for Child Care (NAP SACC) instrument to researchers and practitioners interested in conducting healthy weight intervention in child care. However, a more robust, less subjective measure would be more appropriate for researchers seeking an outcome measure to assess intervention impact.
| S-EPMC1934916 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo develop the Psychiatric Nurse Self-Efficacy Scales, and to examine their reliability and validity.DesignWe developed the Improved Self-Efficacy Scale (ISES) and Decreased Self-Efficacy Scale (DSES) using existing evidence. Statistical analysis was conducted on the data to test reliability and validity.SettingThe study's setting was psychiatric facilities in three prefectures in Japan.ParticipantsData from 514 valid responses were extracted of the 786 responses by psychiatric nurses.Outcome measuresThe study measured the reliability and validity of the scales.ResultsThe ISES has two factors ('Positive changes in the patient' and 'Prospect of continuing in psychiatric nursing') and the DSES has three ('Devaluation of own role as a psychiatric nurse', 'Decrease in nursing ability due to overload' and 'Difficulty in seeing any results in psychiatric nursing'). With regard to scale reliability, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.634-0.845. With regard to scale validity, as the factorial validity of the ISES and DSES, for the ISES, χ2/df (110.625/37) ratio=2.990 (p<0.001), goodness-of-fit index (GFI)=0.962, adjusted GFI (AGFI)=0.932, comparative fit index (CFI)=0.967 and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.062; for the DSES, χ2/df (101.982/37) ratio=2.756 (p<0.001), GFI=0.966, AGFI=0.940, CFI=0.943, RMSEA=0.059 and Akaike Information Criterion=159.982. The concurrent validity of the General Self-Efficacy Scale was r=0.149-0.446 (p<0.01) for ISES and r=-0.154 to -0.462 (p<0.01) for DSES, and the concurrent validity of the Stress Reaction Scale was r=-0.128 to 0.168 for ISES, r=0.214-0.398 for DSES (p<0.01).Statistical analyses showed the scales to be reliable and valid measures.ConclusionsThe ISES and DSES can accurately assess psychiatric nurses' self-efficacy. Using these scales, it is possible to formulate programmes for improving psychiatric nurses' feelings of self-efficacy.
| S-EPMC8744105 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFalls are a common and serious public health issue among older adults, contributing to the loss of independence, psychological distress, and incapability to engage in meaningful occupations, etc. However, there is a lack of abundant information about the fall risk self-evaluation scale for community-dwelling older people. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the preliminary reliability and validity of the fall risk self-assessment scale (FRSAS) among community-dwelling older adults.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted. A total of 230 individuals aged 65 years and over were recruited by a convenience sampling between October and December 2020 from three communities in Haidian district, Beijing. Eligible participants were required to fill in the general condition questionnaire and the fall risk self-assessment scale. The reliability and validity were analyzed by using SPSS 20.0.ResultsTwo hundred twenty-two participants completed the assessment as required (the completion rate was 96.52%). The most items of FRSAS were understood by older adults, which was completed in 10 min. Cronbach's α and intraclass correlation coefficient ICC (2,1) of the scale were 0.757 and 0.967 respectively, suggesting good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Exploratory factor analysis yielded 14 factors that explained 61.744% of the variance. Five items failed to be categorized into any factors because the factor loading of these items was less than 0.4. A future large-sample study needs to be conducted to explore its construct validity. The total scores and dimensional scores except for C-dimension showed significant differences between participants who had experienced a fall in the previous 6 months and those who had not (P < 0.05), indicating good discriminant validity.ConclusionsThe fall risk self-assessment scale including 41 items demonstrated relatively high feasibility as well as satisfactory results in the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and discriminant validity.Trial registrationRegistration number: ChiCTR2000038856 ; Date of registration: 7 Oct 2020.
| S-EPMC8976342 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Duchenne Video Assessment (DVA) assesses quality of movement as an indication of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) disease severity. Caregivers video record patients performing home-based movement tasks using a mobile application, and physical therapists (PTs) rate the videos using scorecards with prespecified compensatory movement criteria. Reliability and construct validity of the DVA were tested using video and Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) data from patients with DMD and healthy controls from a separate study.MethodsFifteen PTs were trained and certified as DVA raters. All raters scored videos of five subjects performing each movement task; nine raters rescored the same videos four weeks later. Three raters scored videos from an average of 25 subjects for each movement task. Aggregate scores were used to test construct validity. An expert DMD clinician assigned each video to a severity group for known-groups analyses. Differences between rater scores across severity groups were tested and correlations between DVA and PODCI scores were calculated.ResultsInter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) between all 15 raters ranged from 0.70 to 0.97 for all movement tasks. Mean intra-rater reliability ICC for nine raters ranged from 0.82 to 0.98 for all movement tasks. There were statistically significant differences between known severity groups for all movement tasks. The DVA correlated strongly with related PODCI constructs of physical function and weakly with unrelated constructs.DiscussionThe DVA was found to be a reliable and valid tool for measuring quality of movement as an indication of disease severity.
| S-EPMC8361683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Proper transfer technique is associated with improved biomechanics and decreased pain and pathology. However, many users do not use proper technique, and appropriate assessment and training are needed to address these deficits. The transfer assessment instrument (TAI) 4.0 was designed to meet those needs and improve on past versions by removing the need for clinician training, shortening administration time, and simplifying question content. Objectives: Evaluate the psychometric properties of the TAI 4.0. Methods: A convenience sample of full-time wheelchair users was scored on multiple transfers by four raters to assess interrater, intrarater, and test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the TAI 4.0. Each user also was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: For 44 participants, the mean TAI 4.0 and VAS across all transfers were 7.58 ± 1.12 and 7.44 ± 1.78, respectively, and scores were significantly correlated (r = 0.52-0.7). VAS scores were more strongly influenced by the flight/landing and body setup phases of the transfer. There were no significant associations between TAI 4.0 score and demographics. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) ranged from 0.80 to 0.85 for interrater reliability, 0.60 to 0.76 for intrarater reliability, and 0.55 to 0.76 for test-retest reliability. The minimum detectable change (MDC) for the total score ranged from 1.02 to 1.30. Conclusion: The TAI 4.0 provides reliable and valid quantitative assessment of an individual's transfer without the need for comprehensive training, as is the case with the TAI 3.0. The tool can be completed in 3 minutes (average) in a clinical setting with only a ruler and goniometer.
| S-EPMC6037322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:A multicenter trial was designed to validate the "Assessment Tools for Asthma (ATA)" questionnaire, a newly developed questionnaire, which evaluates both asthma control and risk factors associated with asthma control with a single instrument. MATERIALS AND METHODS:This cross-sectional study involved 810 cases from 14 clinics in 9 Turkish cities. The ATA questionnaire and Asthma Control Test (ACT) were administered. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the control status of 100 randomized cases. ATA is an eight-item physician-administered questionnaire. It comprises the following two sections-ATA1, assesses symptomatic control criteria, and the remaining section, queries the flare-up of asthma, control of comorbidities, treatment adherence, and inhaler technique. RESULTS:The mean scores for ATA1, ATA total, VAS, and ACT were 24.7±14.8, 53.8±19, 7.1±3, and 18.8±5.5, respectively. According to the ATA questionnaire, among all patients, 34.3% had controlled, 18.8% had partly controlled, and 46.9% had uncontrolled asthma. Furthermore, 16.6% patients had flare-ups between visits, 96.4% patients had uncontrolled comorbidity, 17% patients had irregular asthma treatment, and only 8.4% patients used the incorrect inhaler technique. The ATA questionnaire showed internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficient=0.683). ACT, ATA1, and two specialists' evaluations using VAS correlated strongly with the ATA total scores (Spearman correlation coefficient (r) values: 0.776, 0.783, and 0.909, respectively; p-values: p<0.001, p<0.001, and p<0.001, respectively). According to Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis, the cut-off value of ATA was 50 (sensitivity=84.4%, specificity=82.40%). CONCLUSION:The validated ATA questionnaire may be a practical tool for physicians in asthma management.
| S-EPMC7089703 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe current methods of evaluating cognitive functioning typically rely on a single time point to assess and characterize an individual's performance. However, cognitive functioning fluctuates within individuals over time in relation to environmental, psychological, and physiological contexts. This limits the generalizability and diagnostic utility of single time point assessments, particularly among individuals who may exhibit large variations in cognition depending on physiological or psychological context (eg, those with type 1 diabetes [T1D], who may have fluctuating glucose concentrations throughout the day).ObjectiveWe aimed to report the reliability and validity of cognitive ecological momentary assessment (EMA) as a method for understanding between-person differences and capturing within-person variation in cognition over time in a community sample and sample of adults with T1D.MethodsCognitive performance was measured 3 times a day for 15 days in the sample of adults with T1D (n=198, recruited through endocrinology clinics) and for 10 days in the community sample (n=128, recruited from TestMyBrain, a web-based citizen science platform) using ultrabrief cognitive tests developed for cognitive EMA. Our cognitive EMA platform allowed for remote, automated assessment in participants' natural environments, enabling the measurement of within-person cognitive variation without the burden of repeated laboratory or clinic visits. This allowed us to evaluate reliability and validity in samples that differed in their expected degree of cognitive variability as well as the method of recruitment.ResultsThe results demonstrate excellent between-person reliability (ranging from 0.95 to 0.99) and construct validity of cognitive EMA in both the sample of adults with T1D and community sample. Within-person reliability in both samples (ranging from 0.20 to 0.80) was comparable with that observed in previous studies in healthy older adults. As expected, the full-length baseline and EMA versions of TestMyBrain tests correlated highly with one another and loaded together on the expected cognitive domains when using exploratory factor analysis. Interruptions had higher negative impacts on accuracy-based outcomes (β=-.34 to -.26; all P values <.001) than on reaction time-based outcomes (β=-.07 to -.02; P<.001 to P=.40).ConclusionsWe demonstrated that ultrabrief mobile assessments are both reliable and valid across 2 very different clinic versus community samples, despite the conditions in which cognitive EMAs are administered, which are often associated with more noise and variability. The psychometric characteristics described here should be leveraged appropriately depending on the goals of the cognitive assessment (eg, diagnostic vs everyday functioning) and the population being studied.
| S-EPMC10276323 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Hoarding Rating Scale, Self Report (HRS-SR) is a 5-item assessment developed to ascertain the presence and severity of hoarding symptoms. This study aimed to evaluate the validity of an online adaptation of the HRS-SR in a remote, unsupervised internet sample of 23,214 members of the Brain Health Registry (BHR), an online research registry that evaluates and longitudinally monitors cognition, medical and psychiatric health status. Convergent validity was assessed among a sub-sample of 1,183 participants who completed additional, remote measures of self-reported hoarding behaviors. Structured clinical interviews conducted in-clinic and via video conferencing tools were conducted among 230 BHR participants; ROC curves were plotted to assess the diagnostic performance of the internet-based HRS-SR using best estimate hoarding disorder (HD) diagnoses as the gold standard. The area under the curve indicated near-perfect model accuracy, and was confirmed with 10-fold cross validation. Sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing clinically relevant hoarding were optimized using an HRS-SR total score cut-off of 5. Longitudinal analyses indicated stability of HRS-SR scores over time. Findings indicate that the internet-based HRS-SR is a useful and valid assessment of hoarding symptoms, though additional research using samples with more diverse hoarding behavior is needed to validate optimal cut-off values.
| S-EPMC8080473 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe aim of this methodological study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale adapted to the Turkish community.MethodsThe study sample was completed with 319 patients who had been diagnosed at least 1 year before and hospitalized in the Malatya Turgut Ozal Health Center and Malatya State Hospital in Turkey. A questionnaire that consists of items on sociodemographic characteristics, drug use and information about the disease of patients and the Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale were used for data collection in the study. In reliability analysis of the scale, the Cronbach's α coefficient was calculated and item analysis method was utilized. Factor analysis was used for the construct validity, and Principal Component Analysis and Varimax Rotation method were used for analyzing the factor structures.ResultsAccording to data obtained in the study, item-total correlation of the items of the scale was found to be at an adequate level (0.297-0.803). The scale's Cronbach's α reliability coefficient was found to be 0.86, and there was one factor that explains 52.38% of the total variance with an eigenvalue was greater than 1.0. As a result of the analysis, the factor loadings of the items of the scale were found to be between 0.59 and 0.81.ConclusionDiabetes Self-Efficacy Scale is a valid and reliable instrument for determining the self-efficacy of patients and providing a proper care. It can be suggested to investigate and evaluate the consistency of the scale by applying it to broader sample groups representing different socioeconomic levels.
| S-EPMC6626172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPediatric Migraine Disability Assessment (PedMIDAS) is one of the most frequently used questionnaires to assess disability from migraine in pediatric patients. This work aimed to evaluate the validity and test-retest reliability of the Arabic version of the child self-report versus the parent proxy report PedMIDAS. We also aimed to test the agreement between children's and parents' reports of the scale.MethodsPedMIDAS was subjected to translation and back-translation, then applied to 112 pediatric patients fulfilling the migraine diagnostic criteria. This cross-sectional study was conducted on two visits, one week apart. At visit 1, the following data were obtained from the included pediatric patients: disease duration, migraine type, current treatment regimen, monthly migraine days (MMD) during the last month preceding the enrollment, and migraine intensity using the visual analogue scale. Then, each child and his parent were independently asked to fill out PedMIDAS and Child Self-Report of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory™ 4.0 (PedsQL™) to test the convergent validity of PedMIDAS. At visit 2, each child was requested to complete PedMIDAS again, and so was the parent to evaluate test-retest reliability.ResultsCronbach's alpha was estimated to be 0.94 for each instrument. For the child-self report PedMIDAS, the average measure intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) value was 0.992 (95%CI = 0.989-0.995), while it was estimated to be 0.990 for the parent-proxy report with 95%CI = 0.985-0.993, indicating excellent test-retest reliability for both instruments. The child-self report and the parent-proxy report PedMIDAS scores were significantly correlated with MMD, VAS, and all domains of the corresponding PedsQL, supporting convergent validity for both instruments. Agreement between parent and child on disability grading categories of PedMIDAS was substantial (κ = 0.644).ConclusionThe Arabic version of PedMIDAS was a valid and reliable instrument to assess disability from migraine in Arabic-speaking pediatric patients with migraine. Parent reports can be valuable as a complement to child reports for a comprehensive assessment of migraine.
| S-EPMC10840291 | biostudies-literature