Dataset Information

Development and Initial Validation of a Consumer Questionnaire to Predict the Presence of Ear Disease.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

The already large population of individuals with age- or noise-related hearing loss in the United States is increasing, yet hearing aids remain largely inaccessible. The recent decision by the US Food and Drug Administration to not enforce the medical examination prior to hearing aid fitting highlights the need to reengineer consumer protections when increasing accessibility. A self-administered tool to estimate ear disease risk would provide disease surveillance without posing an unreasonable barrier to hearing aid procurement.

Objective

To develop and validate a consumer questionnaire for the self-assessment of risk for ear diseases associated with hearing loss.

Design, setting, and participants

The questionnaire was developed using established methods including expert opinion to validate and create questions, and cognitive interviews to ensure that questions were clear to respondents. Exploratory structural equation modeling, logistic regression, and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were used to determine sensitivity and specificity with blinded neurotologist opinion as the criterion for evaluation. Patients 40 to 80 years old with ear or hearing complaints necessitating a neurotologic examination and a control group of participants with a diagnosis of age- or noise-related hearing loss participated at the Departments of Otorhinolaryngology and Audiology of Mayo Clinic Florida.

Main outcomes and measures

Sensitivity and specificity of the prototype questionnaire to identify individuals with targeted diseases.

Results

Of 307 participants (mean [SD] age, 62.9 [9.8] years; 148 [48%] female), 75% (n = 231) were enrolled with targeted disease(s) identified on neurotologic assessment and 25% (n = 76) with age- or noise-related hearing loss. Participants were randomly divided into a training sample (80% [n = 246; 185 with disease, 61 controls]) and a test sample (20% [n = 61; 46 with disease, 15 controls]). Using a simple scoring method, a sensitivity of 94% (95% CI, 89%-97%) and specificity of 61% (95% CI, 47%-73%) were established in the training sample. Applying this cutoff to the test sample resulted in 85% (95% CI, 71%-93%) sensitivity and 47% (95% CI, 22%-73%) specificity.

Conclusions and relevance

This is the first self-assessment tool designed to assess an individual's risk for ear disease. Our preliminary results demonstrate a high sensitivity to disease detection. A further validated and refined version of this questionnaire may serve as an efficacious tool for improving access to hearing health care while minimizing the risk for missed ear diseases.

SUBMITTER: Kleindienst SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5710257 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Misophonia is characterized by decreased tolerance and accompanying defensive motivational system responding to certain aversive sounds and contextual cues associated with such stimuli, typically repetitive oral (e. g., eating sounds) or nasal (e.g., breathing sounds) stimuli. Responses elicit significant psychological distress and impairment in functioning, and include acute increases in (a) negative affect (e.g., anger, anxiety, and disgust), (b) physiological arousal (e.g., sympathetic nervous system activation), and (c) overt behavior (e.g., escape behavior and verbal aggression toward individuals generating triggers). A major barrier to research and treatment of misophonia is the lack of rigorously validated assessment measures. As such, the primary purpose of this study was to develop and psychometrically validate a self-report measure of misophonia, the Duke Misophonia Questionnaire (DMQ). There were two phases of measure development. In Phase 1, items were generated and iteratively refined from a combination of the scientific literature and qualitative feedback from misophonia sufferers, their family members, and professional experts. In Phase 2, a large community sample of adults (n = 424) completed DMQ candidate items and other measures needed for psychometric analyses. A series of iterative analytic procedures (e.g., factor analyses and IRT) were used to derive final DMQ items and scales. The final DMQ has 86 items and includes subscales: (1) Trigger frequency (16 items), (2) Affective Responses (5 items), (3) Physiological Responses (8 items), (4) Cognitive Responses (10 items), (5) Coping Before (6 items), (6) Coping During (10 items), (7) Coping After (5 items), (8) Impairment (12 items), and Beliefs (14 items). Composite scales were derived for overall Symptom Severity (combined Affective, Physiological, and Cognitive subscales) and Coping (combined the three Coping subscales). Depending on the needs of researchers or clinicians, the DMQ may be use in full form, individual subscales, or with the derived composite scales.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The impact of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) on the quality of life of patients has been neglected in research studies worldwide. The few reported studies have used non-specific questionnaires for the disease, which represents a limitation since generic instruments may not address specific aspects of the disease, compromising the evaluation of its real impact. The aim of this paper is to describe the development and the initial validation of an instrument for evaluating the impact of CL, named the Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Impact Questionnaire. METHODOLOGY:The formulation and validation of the instrument consisted of the following steps: (1) literature review; (2) conceptual framework construction and initial item generation; (3) tool analysis by health professionals (experts); (4) tool evaluation performed by the patients; and (5) a pilot study with 100 patients with localized CL, evaluated at a reference ambulatory facility in Belo Horizonte, in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. The structure of the proposed instrument was analyzed using hierarchical cluster analysis (ICLUST). RESULTS:Twenty-seven items were initially proposed by the researchers to compose the questionnaire. Content validity (evaluates if the instrument fully assesses the construct of interest) was evaluated by the panel of experts, while face validity (evaluates how potential participants interpret the items) was evaluated by the target population. In this step, some items were excluded, reformulated and/or included. After evaluating a factorial structure of the items in accordance with the cluster analysis, we assembled a questionnaire with 25 items (alpha = 0.86), with high reliability and homogeneity, which address the following: 1) the general impact of the disease (alpha = 0.91, beta = 0.67) and 2) the evaluation of the perception about the treatment and health services (alpha = 0.72, beta = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS:The Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Impact Questionnaire, developed with contributions from patients and experts, was confirmed, in this first validation, as a useful and reliable instrument.

Project description:Consumers play an important role as one of the main actors in food safety social co-governance. To create a pattern of food safety social co-governance, the active and effective participation of consumers is critical. To encourage consumers to participate in food safety social co-governance voluntarily and positively, we attempted to develop and preliminarily validate a multidimensional questionnaire on consumer psychological capital that could be used to measure the degree of consumer participation in food safety social co-governance. The aim of the initial sample (N = 170) and test sample 2 (N = 204) was to investigate the factor structure of a preliminary measure of consumer psychological capital. A 4-factor model with 23 items explained 61.05% of the total variance in item scores. The aim of test sample 3 (N = 30) was to measure the retest reliability. Test sample 4 (N = 1,076) was randomly allocated to the modeling sample (N = 538) and validation sample (N = 538) to verify questionnaire reliability and validity. Convergent validity, discriminant validity, and the internal inconsistency coefficients of the questionnaire were assessed in the modeling sample. While processing CFA, we deleted 9 items with small standardized factor loadings. The remaining 14 items in the final revised 4-factor model included self-efficacy, resilience, hope, and optimism. The fit indices of the revised four-factor model and second-order factor model in the modeling sample revealed an acceptable model fit. The convergent validity and discriminant validity of the revised model were good and acceptable, respectively. A cross-validation procedure confirmed the appropriateness of the revised four-factor model and second-order factor model in the validation sample. The cross-validation results confirmed that the fit indices of the revised four-factor model fitted the data well and the second-order factor model in the validation sample reached acceptable values. We concluded that the questionnaire developed in this study had good reliability and stable and acceptable construct validity. It could provide a theoretical basis for measuring psychological capital in food safety co-governance.