Dataset Information

Reliability and Validity of the Lichtenberg Financial Decision Screening Scale.

ABSTRACT: The scarcity of empirically validated assessment instruments continues to impede the work of professionals in a number of fields, including medicine, finance, and estate planning; adult protective services; and criminal justice-and, more importantly, it impedes their ability to effectively assist and, in some case, protect their clients. Other professionals (e.g. legal, financial, medical, mental health services) are in a position to prevent financial exploitation and would benefit from access to new instruments. The Lichtenberg Financial Decision Screening Scale (LFDSS) was introduced in 2016, along with evidence for its convergent validity (Lichtenberg et al., 2016). Using a sample of 213 participants, this study investigated the internal consistency of the LFDSS and its criterion validity based on ratings by professionals using the scale. Results demonstrate that the LFDSS has excellent internal consistency and clinical utility properties. This paper provides support for use of the LFDSS as a reliable and valid instrument. The LFDSS and instructions for its use are included in the article, along with information about online tools and support.

SUBMITTER: Lichtenberg PA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5637552 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reliability and Validity of the Lichtenberg Financial Decision Screening Scale.

Lichtenberg Peter A PA Teresi Jeanne A JA Ocepek-Welikson Katja K Eimicke Joseph P JP

Innovation in aging 20170326 1

The scarcity of empirically validated assessment instruments continues to impede the work of professionals in a number of fields, including medicine, finance, and estate planning; adult protective services; and criminal justice-and, more importantly, it impedes their ability to effectively assist and, in some case, protect their clients. Other professionals (e.g. legal, financial, medical, mental health services) are in a position to prevent financial exploitation and would benefit from access t ...[more]

PMID: 29034335

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Happiness Index Scale (HIS) is a newly developed scale by our group to screen for common psychological illnesses among general hospital inpatients. This study aimed to analyze the reliability, validity and screening effect of the HIS and to explore its clinical application.MethodsFrom April 1, 2021, to December 31, 2021, a total of 8405 continuous inpatients were enrolled from different departments of a large tertiary general hospital with 1385 inpatient beds in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China. Using a cross-sectional survey design, each participant was assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire 9(PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 items(GAD-7), Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS), Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) and HIS within 24 h of admission. McDonald's ω coefficient, the Guttman split-half coefficient and the test-retest reliability coefficient were used to evaluate the reliability of the HIS and the construct validity and criterion validity of the validity tests. Scores on the PHQ-9, GAD-7, AIS, and C-SSRS were used as the gold standard tools to analyze the screening effect of the HIS.ResultsThe HIS exhibited very good reliability, with a McDonald's ω coefficient of 0.825, a Guttman split-half coefficient of 0.920 and a test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.745 (P < 0.05). Confirmatory factor analysis showed a satisfactory model fitting index with a χ2/df = 2.602, a root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.014, a standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) of 0.010, a comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.992, and a Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) of 0.983. The correlation coefficient between the total score of each dimension of the scale and the corresponding criterion was 0.854 ~ 0.949 (P < 0.001). The HIS showed a very good distinguishing effect. The average HIS score of inpatients who screened positive for psychological problems was significantly higher than that of inpatients who screened negative for psychological problems (t = 3790.619, P < 0.001). The effect size was very large (Cohens d = 2.695, 95% CI = 2.630 ~ 2.761). Approximately 90.2% of the positive and negative screening results of the HIS were matched with the gold standard tools, with a kappa value of 0.747 (P < 0.001). The screening effect test showed a sensitivity (true positive rate) of 92.9% and a specificity (true negative rate) of 89.5%.ConclusionThe HIS exhibited satisfactory reliability and validity and a clinically meaningful screening effect with a much shorter version compared to the commonly used screening scales. Thus, it could potentially be useful as the first screening step to rule out psychological conditions for inpatients in general hospitals or to remind medical teams of further psychological concerns.

Dataset Information

Reliability and Validity of the Lichtenberg Financial Decision Screening Scale.

Publications

Reliability and Validity of the Lichtenberg Financial Decision Screening Scale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets