Development and validation of the Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale: An adjective rating scale.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Crowe ML
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6033649 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Development and validation of the Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale: An adjective rating scale.
Crowe Michael L ML Edershile Elizabeth A EA Wright Aidan G C AGC Campbell W Keith WK Lynam Donald R DR Miller Joshua D JD
Psychological assessment 20180521 7
There is an ongoing debate regarding the nature of narcissism such that some argue that narcissistic individuals oscillate between grandiose and vulnerable states, whereas others argue these dimensions are stable traits (e.g., grandiose individuals remain in grandiose states). Scales sensitive to fluctuations in narcissistic states are necessary to address this question. The current study (N = 1,613 across three samples) validates the newly developed Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale (NVS), a bri ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and objectivesPatient adherence to treatment is an important barrier to the implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments (EBPTs). There is a need for simple and deployable measures of patient adherence to treatment for use across EBPTs. The Treatment Adherence Rating Scale (TARS) was developed and validated in two samples.MethodsThis study includes two samples: adults with Major Depressive Disorder who received Cognitive Therapy for depression (Sample 1; N = 48, mean age = 44.27 years), and at-risk adolescents who received either the Transdiagnostic Sleep and Circadian Intervention or Psychoeducation (Sample 2; N = 176, mean age = 14.77 years). Factor structure of the TARS scores was examined via Exploratory Factor Analyses (EFA) in Sample 1 and Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA) in Sample 2. Internal consistency, predictive validity, and construct validity of the TARS scores were examined.ResultsResults from EFA in Sample 1 supported a one-factor model. Results from CFA in Sample 2 suggested that a two-factor model (i.e., agreement and compliance) fit better than a one-factor model. TARS scores from both samples demonstrated adequate predictive validity with primary clinical outcomes and construct validity with treatment expectations.LimitationsThe sample was small with two specific populations. Future research should focus on other patient populations, a larger population, and other EBPTs. Future research examining patient ratings of these items are needed for further validation of the TARS.ConclusionsPreliminary findings support the use of a two-factor model and highlight the potential utility of a simple measure of patient adherence to treatment across age and diagnostic groups.
| S-EPMC10013098 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Oromandibular dystonia manifests with sustained or task-specific contractions of the masticatory, tongue, and/or other muscles in the stomatognathic system. Since its symptoms can vary, it has been difficult to objectively measure disease severity and post-treatment changes. Objective: To develop and validate a comprehensive measurement tool for oromandibular dystonia. Methods: An examiner-rated scale included three subscales for severity, disability, and pain, modified specifically for oromandibular dystonia from the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale-2. To evaluate the severity of each subtype of oromandibular dystonia, four of the six items were selected according to the subtype (jaw closing dystonia, tongue dystonia, jaw opening dystonia, jaw deviation [protrusion] dystonia, and lip dystonia). A patient-administered questionnaire based on clinical features and other relevant aspects associated with oromandibular dystonia was developed, which included five subscales: general, eating, speech, cosmetic, and social/family life. The questionnaire, examiner-rated scale, and four subscales (sleep, annoyance, mood, and psychosocial functioning) of the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile-58 were combined to construct the oromandibular dystonia rating scale (OMDRS). The reliability and validity of the scale were assessed using clinimetric testing. Results: Six hundred and eighteen patients with oromandibular dystonia (394 women and 224 men; mean age, 51.7 years) were evaluated by the OMDRS. The overall OMDRS showed high-level internal consistency measured by Cronbach's alpha (0.95) with a logical factor structure. Cronbach's alpha for the subscales was satisfactory to excellent, ranging from 0.72 to 0.94. All items revealed acceptable inter-rater reliability (kappa > 0.4, interclass correlation coefficient > 0.6). Repeated ratings of videotapes revealed acceptable intra-rater reliability for all items (kappa > 0.76, interclass correlation coefficient > 0.86). Test-retest reliability showed a significant (p < 0.001) correlation efficiency. The OMDRS showed significant (p < 0.001) convergent and discriminant validity and significant (p < 0.001) sensitivity to changes after botulinum toxin therapy. Conclusion: The OMDRS can be useful for the comprehensive evaluation of disease severity, disability, psychosocial functioning, and impact on the quality of life as well as therapeutic changes in patients with oromandibular dystonia.
| S-EPMC7669987 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe number of mobile health (mHealth) apps continues to rise each year. Widespread use of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) has allowed objective and multidimensional evaluation of the quality of these apps. However, no Japanese version of MARS has been made available to date.ObjectiveThe purposes of this study were (1) to develop a Japanese version of MARS and (2) to assess the translated version's reliability and validity in evaluating mHealth apps.MethodsTo develop the Japanese version of MARS, cross-cultural adaptation was used using a universalist approach. A total of 50 mental health apps were evaluated by 2 independent raters. Internal consistency and interrater reliability were then calculated. Convergent and divergent validity were assessed using multitrait scaling analysis and concurrent validity.ResultsAfter cross-cultural adaptation, all 23 items from the original MARS were included in the Japanese version. Following translation, back-translation, and review by the author of the original MARS, a Japanese version of MARS was finalized. Internal consistency was acceptable by all subscales of objective and subjective quality (Cronbach α=.78-.89). Interrater reliability was deemed acceptable, with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) ranging from 0.61 to 0.79 for all subscales, except for "functionality," which had an ICC of 0.40. Convergent/divergent validity and concurrent validity were also considered acceptable. The rate of missing responses was high in several items in the "information" subscale.ConclusionsA Japanese version of MARS was developed and shown to be reliable and valid to a degree that was comparable to the original MARS. This Japanese version of MARS can be used as a standard to evaluate the quality and credibility of mHealth apps.
| S-EPMC9052018 | biostudies-literature
Project description:One of the most representative symptoms during childbirth is pain, which is one of the most prominent concerns of pregnant women. There are different instruments to assess pain, all of which require interrupting the woman, thus interfering with the intimacy of childbirth. This study seeks to develop and validate a rating scale of the expression of childbirth pain that does not require the mother's attention and respects her privacy during labor. The study was conducted at a regional hospital in a border town in southern Spain between November 2018 and September 2019. Scale items were developed following a review of the scientific literature, and experts judged the content validity. After a pilot test, the scale was psychometrically evaluated. The psychometric tests consisted of internal consistency analysis, exploratory factor analysis, and determination of the content, construct, and convergent validity. The scale was evaluated by 36 experts in the field and was then applied to 55 women during the active phase of childbirth. The final version of the Rating Scale of Pain Expression during Childbirth (in Spanish, Escala de Valoración de la Expresión del Dolor durante el Trabajo de Parto-ESVADOPA) consists of six items in two dimensions. The scale had a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.78, and the content validity measured by Aiken's V co-efficient was also 0.78. The exploratory factor analysis yielded two dimensions that explained 68.08% of the total variance. For convergent validity, a comparison was made with the visual analogue scale, yielding a medium-high value of 0.641. As indicated by the internal consistency and by the content and construct validity outcomes, the ESVADOPA successfully measures pain expression during childbirth and represents a suitable tool for pain expression during birth without the need for intervention or the need for the mother to speak the same language as the midwife.
| S-EPMC7459959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Existing scales for rating the severity of blepharospasm (BSP) are limited by a number of potential drawbacks. We therefore developed and validated a novel scale for rating the severity of BSP. The development of the scale started with careful examination of the clinical spectrum of the condition by a panel of experts who selected phenomenological aspects thought to be relevant to disease severity. Thereafter, selected items were first checked for reliability, then reliable items were combined to generate the scale, and clinimetric properties of the scale were evaluated. Finally, the confidence with which the scale could be used by people without high levels of movement disorders skill was assessed. The new scale, based on objective criteria, yielded moderate to almost perfect reliability, acceptable internal consistency, satisfactory scaling assumptions, lack of floor and ceiling effects, partial correlations with a prior severity scale and with a quality of life scale, and good sensitivity to change. Despite a few limitations, the foregoing features make the novel scale more suitable than existing scales to assess the severity of BSP in natural history and pathophysiologic studies as well as in clinical trials.
| S-EPMC4878674 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWith thousands of health apps in app stores globally, it is crucial to systemically and thoroughly evaluate the quality of these apps due to their potential influence on health decisions and outcomes. The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) is the only currently available tool that provides a comprehensive, multidimensional evaluation of app quality, which has been used to compare medical apps from American and European app stores in various areas, available in English, Italian, Spanish, and German. However, this tool is not available in Arabic.ObjectiveThis study aimed to translate and adapt MARS to Arabic and validate the tool with a sample of health apps aimed at managing or preventing obesity and associated disorders.MethodsWe followed a well-established and defined "universalist" process of cross-cultural adaptation using a mixed methods approach. Early translations of the tool, accompanied by confirmation of the contents by two rounds of separate discussions, were included and culminated in a final version, which was then back-translated into English. Two trained researchers piloted the MARS in Arabic (MARS-Ar) with a sample of 10 weight management apps obtained from Google Play and the App Store. Interrater reliability was established using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). After reliability was ascertained, the two researchers independently evaluated a set of additional 56 apps.ResultsMARS-Ar was highly aligned with the original English version. The ICCs for MARS-Ar (0.836, 95% CI 0.817-0.853) and MARS English (0.838, 95% CI 0.819-0.855) were good. The MARS-Ar subscales were highly correlated with the original counterparts (P<.001). The lowest correlation was observed in the area of usability (r=0.685), followed by aesthetics (r=0.827), information quality (r=0.854), engagement (r=0.894), and total app quality (r=0.897). Subjective quality was also highly correlated (r=0.820).ConclusionsMARS-Ar is a valid instrument to assess app quality among trained Arabic-speaking users of health and fitness apps. Researchers and public health professionals in the Arab world can use the overall MARS score and its subscales to reliably evaluate the quality of weight management apps. Further research is necessary to test the MARS-Ar on apps addressing various health issues, such as attention or anxiety prevention, or sexual and reproductive health.
| S-EPMC7078658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The menopause transition is a time when women experience an increased risk for new onset depression, as well as relapse of depression. While there are overlapping symptoms between major depression and depression during menopause, differences suggest 'perimenopausal depression' may be a unique subtype of depression associated with characteristic symptoms. There is currently no validated scale designed to measure perimenopausal depression. The aim of the current study was to develop and validate the 'Meno-D', a self-reporting or clinician rated questionnaire, designed to rate the severity of symptoms of perimenopausal depression. The development phase of the Meno-D involved literature review, clinical observation, and focus groups. A 12-item questionnaire was developed and clinically reviewed for face validity for content. The Meno-D was administered to women experiencing symptoms of perimenopausal depression as part of a larger baseline assessment battery. Validation involved confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The development of the Meno-D resulted in 12 items. A total of 93 participants with perimenopausal depression were involved in the baseline assessments, 82 completed the Meno-D. Factor analysis identified five sub-scales of the Meno-D "somatic; cognitive; self; sleep; sexual" with high-internal consistency; discriminant validity and a good construct and convergent validity. The Meno-D provides a unique tool for clinicians and researchers to measure the presence of perimenopausal depression.
| S-EPMC6023883 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMobile health apps (MHA) have the potential to improve health care. The commercial MHA market is rapidly growing, but the content and quality of available MHA are unknown. Instruments for the assessment of the quality and content of MHA are highly needed. The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) is one of the most widely used tools to evaluate the quality of MHA. Only few validation studies investigated its metric quality. No study has evaluated the construct validity and concurrent validity.ObjectiveThis study evaluates the construct validity, concurrent validity, reliability, and objectivity, of the MARS.MethodsData was pooled from 15 international app quality reviews to evaluate the metric properties of the MARS. The MARS measures app quality across four dimensions: engagement, functionality, aesthetics and information quality. Construct validity was evaluated by assessing related competing confirmatory models by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Non-centrality (RMSEA), incremental (CFI, TLI) and residual (SRMR) fit indices were used to evaluate the goodness of fit. As a measure of concurrent validity, the correlations to another quality assessment tool (ENLIGHT) were investigated. Reliability was determined using Omega. Objectivity was assessed by intra-class correlation.ResultsIn total, MARS ratings from 1,299 MHA covering 15 different health domains were included. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed a bifactor model with a general factor and a factor for each dimension (RMSEA = 0.074, TLI = 0.922, CFI = 0.940, SRMR = 0.059). Reliability was good to excellent (Omega 0.79 to 0.93). Objectivity was high (ICC = 0.82). MARS correlated with ENLIGHT (ps<.05).ConclusionThe metric evaluation of the MARS demonstrated its suitability for the quality assessment. As such, the MARS could be used to make the quality of MHA transparent to health care stakeholders and patients. Future studies could extend the present findings by investigating the re-test reliability and predictive validity of the MARS.
| S-EPMC7605637 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: In developing the PatientsLikeMe online platform for patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS), we required a patient-reported assessment of functional status that was easy to complete and identified disability in domains other than walking. Existing measures of functional status were inadequate, clinician-reported, focused on walking, and burdensome to complete. In response, we developed the Multiple Sclerosis Rating Scale (MSRS). METHODS: We adapted a clinician-rated measure, the Guy's Neurological Disability Scale, to a self-report scale and deployed it to an online community. As part of our validation process we reviewed discussions between patients, conducted patient cognitive debriefing, and made minor improvements to form a revised scale (MSRS-R) before deploying a cross-sectional survey to patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) on the PatientsLikeMe platform. The survey included MSRS-R and comparator measures: MSIS-29, PDDS, NARCOMS Performance Scales, PRIMUS, and MSWS-12. RESULTS: In total, 816 RRMS patients responded (19% response rate). The MSRS-R exhibited high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha?=?.86). The MSRS-R walking item was highly correlated with alternative walking measures (PDDS, ??=?.84; MSWS-12, ??=?.83; NARCOMS mobility question, ??=?.86). MSRS-R correlated well with comparison instruments and differentiated between known groups by PDDS disease stage and relapse burden in the past two years. Factor analysis suggested a single factor accounting for 51.5% of variance. CONCLUSIONS: The MSRS-R is a concise measure of MS-related functional disability, and may have advantages for disease measurement over longer and more burdensome instruments that are restricted to a smaller number of domains or measure quality of life. Studies are underway describing the use of the instrument in contexts outside our online platform such as clinical practice or trials. The MSRS-R is released for use under creative commons license.
| S-EPMC3502161 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe number of mobile health apps (MHAs), which are developed to promote healthy behaviors, prevent disease onset, manage and cure diseases, or assist with rehabilitation measures, has exploded. App store star ratings and descriptions usually provide insufficient or even false information about app quality, although they are popular among end users. A rigorous systematic approach to establish and evaluate the quality of MHAs is urgently needed. The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) is an assessment tool that facilitates the objective and systematic evaluation of the quality of MHAs. However, a German MARS is currently not available.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to translate and validate a German version of the MARS (MARS-G).MethodsThe original 19-item MARS was forward and backward translated twice, and the MARS-G was created. App description items were extended, and 104 MHAs were rated twice by eight independent bilingual researchers, using the MARS-G and MARS. The internal consistency, validity, and reliability of both scales were assessed. Mokken scale analysis was used to investigate the scalability of the overall scores.ResultsThe retranslated scale showed excellent alignment with the original MARS. Additionally, the properties of the MARS-G were comparable to those of the original MARS. The internal consistency was good for all subscales (ie, omega ranged from 0.72 to 0.91). The correlation coefficients (r) between the dimensions of the MARS-G and MARS ranged from 0.93 to 0.98. The scalability of the MARS (H=0.50) and MARS-G (H=0.48) were good.ConclusionsThe MARS-G is a reliable and valid tool for experts and stakeholders to assess the quality of health apps in German-speaking populations. The overall score is a reliable quality indicator. However, further studies are needed to assess the factorial structure of the MARS and MARS-G.
| S-EPMC7148545 | biostudies-literature