Dataset Information

Self-Report Measures of Parental Self-Efficacy: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature.

ABSTRACT: Parenting self-efficacy (PSE) describes a parent's belief in their ability to perform the parenting role successfully. Higher levels of PSE have consistently been shown to be correlated with a wide range of parenting and child outcomes. Consequently, many parenting interventions aim to improve PSE. PSE measurement has typically been via self-report measures. However, the wide range of available measures has resulted in their limited use, inconsistent terminology and ambiguous theoretical grounding. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the psychometric and administrative qualities of the available PSE measures and offer clarity to the terminology and the theory underpinning their use so that the future use of PSE measures can be appropriate. Eleven electronic databases were searched. Articles were included if they introduced a new measure or were psychometric evaluations of an available measure of PSE for parents of children (from infancy until 18 years of age). Thirty-four measures were identified and their psychometric and administrative qualities were examined. Overall, the quality of the available measures was varied. Whilst this review makes recommendations regarding PSE measures for parents of infants through to adolescents, some caution should be applied when choosing the most appropriate measure. The theoretical grounding of each measure was clarified so that appropriate measures can be chosen under the relevant circumstances. The implications of refinement of the available measures are discussed and further research into improving PSE measurement is identified.

SUBMITTER: Wittkowski A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5646137 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Self-Report Measures of Parental Self-Efficacy: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature.

Wittkowski Anja A Garrett Charlotte C Calam Rachel R Weisberg Daniel D

Journal of child and family studies 20170706 11

Parenting self-efficacy (PSE) describes a parent's belief in their ability to perform the parenting role successfully. Higher levels of PSE have consistently been shown to be correlated with a wide range of parenting and child outcomes. Consequently, many parenting interventions aim to improve PSE. PSE measurement has typically been via self-report measures. However, the wide range of available measures has resulted in their limited use, inconsistent terminology and ambiguous theoretical groundi ...[more]

PMID: 29081640

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThe increasing recognition of the complex impacts of a cancer diagnosis and its treatment has led to efforts to develop instruments to reflect survivors' needs accurately. However, evidence regarding the content and quality of instruments used to evaluate the unmet needs of lymphoma survivors is lacking. This review aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties and comprehensiveness of available self-report instruments to assess unmet needs and quality of life with adult lymphoma survivors.MethodsA systematic search of five databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PsycInfo and Scopus) was conducted to identify instruments measuring unmet needs or quality of life outcomes. Original articles reporting the instrument's validation or development via citation screening were retrieved and screened against eligibility criteria. An appraisal of the instrument's measurement properties was conducted, guided by the COSMIN methodology and reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A content comparison using the Supportive Care in Cancer Framework was performed.ResultsTwelve instruments met the inclusion criteria; only one was explicitly developed for lymphoma (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma). Four instruments focused on the construct of need, and eight focused on quality of life. The psychometric data in the published literature is not comprehensive; there is heterogeneity in their development, content and quality. No included instrument was examined for all COSMIN measurement properties, and methodological quality was variable; all instruments measured at least four domains of need. The emotional domain was reviewed by all instruments (n = 12), and the spiritual and informational domains received the least focus (n = 4 each).ConclusionThis review provides a platform for instrument comparison, with suggestions for important factors to consider in systematically selecting unmet needs and quality of life self-report measures for adult lymphoma survivors. Considering the various discrepancies and limitations of the available instruments, using more than one instrument is recommended. In selecting measurement instruments, researchers should consider research objectives, study design, psychometric properties and the pros and cons of using more than one measure. Evaluating the participant burden and feasibility of completing the selected instrument is important for lymphoma survivors, a group burdened by cancer-related fatigue and cognitive impairment.

Project description:BackgroundIn healthcare, a gap exists between what is known from research and what is practiced. Understanding this gap depends upon our ability to robustly measure research utilization.ObjectivesThe objectives of this systematic review were: to identify self-report measures of research utilization used in healthcare, and to assess the psychometric properties (acceptability, reliability, and validity) of these measures.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of literature reporting use or development of self-report research utilization measures. Our search included: multiple databases, ancestry searches, and a hand search. Acceptability was assessed by examining time to complete the measure and missing data rates. Our approach to reliability and validity assessment followed that outlined in the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing.ResultsOf 42,770 titles screened, 97 original studies (108 articles) were included in this review. The 97 studies reported on the use or development of 60 unique self-report research utilization measures. Seven of the measures were assessed in more than one study. Study samples consisted of healthcare providers (92 studies) and healthcare decision makers (5 studies). No studies reported data on acceptability of the measures. Reliability was reported in 32 (33%) of the studies, representing 13 of the 60 measures. Internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha) reliability was reported in 31 studies; values exceeded 0.70 in 29 studies. Test-retest reliability was reported in 3 studies with Pearson's r coefficients > 0.80. No validity information was reported for 12 of the 60 measures. The remaining 48 measures were classified into a three-level validity hierarchy according to the number of validity sources reported in 50% or more of the studies using the measure. Level one measures (n = 6) reported evidence from any three (out of four possible) Standards validity sources (which, in the case of single item measures, was all applicable validity sources). Level two measures (n = 16) had evidence from any two validity sources, and level three measures (n = 26) from only one validity source.ConclusionsThis review reveals significant underdevelopment in the measurement of research utilization. Substantial methodological advances with respect to construct clarity, use of research utilization and related theory, use of measurement theory, and psychometric assessment are required. Also needed are improved reporting practices and the adoption of a more contemporary view of validity (i.e., the Standards) in future research utilization measurement studies.

Project description:The crisis in child and adolescent mental health and wellbeing has prompted the development of school and community-based interventions to tackle negative emotions towards the self. Providing an evidence-base for such interventions is therefore a priority for policy makers and practitioners. This paper presents the first systematic review of self-referential and self-report measures of negative emotions for use with non-clinical child/adolescent populations, and evaluation of their psychometric properties. A systematic search of electronic databases and grey literature was conducted. Peer reviewed articles that introduced a new measure or included psychometric evaluation of a negative self-referential emotion for children and/or adolescents were identified. Study characteristics were extracted, and psychometric properties rated using internationally recognised quality criteria. Initially, 98 measures designed for evaluating children and adolescents' negative self-referential emotions were found. Measures were primarily excluded if they were intended for clinical diagnosis or did not focus on self-referential emotions. The remaining eight measures (Brief Shame and Guilt Questionnaire; Self-Consciousness Scale-Children; Shame and Guilt Scale for Adolescents; Test of Self-Conscious Affect- Adolescents; The Child-Adolescent Perfectionism Scale [CAPS]; Child and Adolescent Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale Revised; Children Automatic Thoughts Scale [CATS]; Negative Affect Self-Statement Questionnaire) were organised into domains consisting of self-conscious emotions, self-oriented perfectionism and negative self-cognitions. Psychometric quality ratings identified the CAPS (Flett et al. in J Psychoeduc Assess 34:634-652, 2016) and the CATS (Schniering and Rapee in Behav Res Ther 40:1091-1109, 2002) as having the strongest psychometric qualities. However, all reviewed measures lacked full evaluation of essential psychometric properties. Our review revealed a paucity of self-referential emotional measures suitable for assessing adverse negative self-referential emotions in general child and adolescent populations. Measures suitable for use in non-clinical samples were identified, but these require further evaluation and/or new scale developments are needed. The psychometric findings and methodological issues identified will guide researchers and practitioners to make evidence-based decisions in order to select optimal measures.

Project description:IntroductionDepression is a common debilitating disease that affects individuals in all age groups. The impact of the diagnosis extends beyond the individual, with negative effects on mental health, physical health and social well-being. Self-efficacy has been referenced as an important aspect to the prognosis of mood disorders by conferring co-responsibility to the affected individual to face his/her health problems. Several assessment tools are found in the literature for measuring self-efficacy, but it is not yet clear which of these measures are more applicable to individuals with mood disorders, particularly depression. Thus, the aim of present study is to propose a systematic review to examine the psychometric properties and applicability of assessment tools designed to measure self-efficacy in individuals with symptoms and/or a diagnosis of depression.Methods and analysisThis protocol is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement and the review will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The evaluation of the psychometric properties of the health outcome measures will be conducted according to COSMIN guidelines. Two independent reviewers will perform the electronic searches in the PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, SCOPUS and CINAHL databases, followed by the use of the 'snowball' strategy. The inclusion criteria will be (1) instrument validation studies, (2) developed with individuals of any age (3) with symptoms or a diagnosis of depression. Two independent reviewers will analyse the titles and abstracts of the articles retrieved during the search for pre-selection, followed by full-text analyses to determine inclusion in the review based on the eligibility criteria. Cases of a divergence of opinion will be resolved by a third reviewer. Descriptive analysis of the articles will be performed (data on participants, characteristics, psychometric properties and clinical usefulness of the assessment tools).Ethics and disseminationThe proposed systematic review will provide information on assessment tools employed to measure self-efficacy with regard to coping with depression, offering data on the psychometric properties, strong and weak points, and clinical applicability. As a secondary analysis of the literature, the approval of an ethics committee is not required.Prospero registration numberCRD42017078707.

Dataset Information

Self-Report Measures of Parental Self-Efficacy: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature.

Publications

Self-Report Measures of Parental Self-Efficacy: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets