Dataset Information

Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8: psychometric evaluation.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Patient-centered care and evidence-based practice (EBP) are core competencies for health care professionals. The importance of EBP has led to an increase in research involving clinical outcomes; current recommendations emphasize collecting patient focused measures, thus increasing the need for psychometrically sound patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) of health. Disablement has been identified as a valuable multi-dimensional construct for patient care. The Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8 (DPA SF-8) has been proposed as a tool to be used in the physically active population that assesses a physical summary component of health and a quality of life component however, further analysis is necessary to ensure the instrument is psychometrically sound. METHODS:Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted on the DPA SF-8 at each time point to ensure factor structure. Reliability of the scale and internal consistency of the subscales were assessed, and a minimal detectable change (MDC) calculated. Additionally, a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was also established, and invariance testing across three time points and groups was conducted. RESULTS:The CFAs at all three visits exceeded recommended model fit indices. The interclass correlation coefficient value (.924) calculated indicated excellent scale reliability and Cronbach's alpha for subscales PHY and QOL were within recommend values. The MDC value calculated was 5.83 and the MCID for persistent injuries were 2 points and for acute injuries, 3 points. The DPA SF-8 was invariant across time and across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS:The DPA SF-8 met CFA recommendations and criteria for multi-group and longitudinal invariance testing, which indicates the scale may be used to assess for differences between the groups or across time. Our overall analysis indicates the DPA SF-8 is a valid, reliable, and responsive instrument to assess patient improvement in the physically active population.

SUBMITTER: Casanova MP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8669416 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The need for reliable, valid tools to measure patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is critical both for research and for evaluating treatment effects in practice. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Fatigue-Short Form v1.0-Fatigue 7a (PROMIS F-SF) has had limited psychometric evaluation in various populations.The aim of the study is to examine psychometric properties of PROMIS F-SF item responses across various populations.Data from five studies with common data elements were used in this secondary analysis. Samples from patients with fibromyalgia, sickle cell disease, cardiometabolic risk, pregnancy, and healthy controls were used. Reliability was estimated using Cronbach's alpha. Dimensionality was evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis. Concurrent validity was evaluated by examining Pearson's correlations between scores from the PROMIS F-SF, the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form, and the Brief Fatigue Inventory. Discriminant validity was evaluated by examining Pearson's correlations between scores on the PROMIS F-SF and measures of stress and depressive symptoms. Known groups validity was assessed by comparing PROMIS F-SF scores in the clinical samples to healthy controls.Reliability of PROMIS F-SF scores was adequate across samples, ranging from .72 in the pregnancy sample to .88 in healthy controls. Unidimensionality was supported in each sample. Concurrent validity was strong; across the groups, correlations with scores on the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form and Brief Fatigue Inventory ranged from .60 to .85. Correlations of the PROMIS F-SF with measures of stress and depressive mood were moderate to strong, ranging from .37 to .64. PROMIS F-SF scores were significantly higher in clinical samples compared to healthy controls.Reliability and validity of the PROMIS F-SF were acceptable. The PROMIS F-SF is a suitable measure of fatigue across the four diverse clinical populations included in the analysis.

Project description:BackgroundAnxiety and depression are common in children and adolescents, which can be detected via self-report questionnaires in non-clinical settings like the school environment. Two short versions of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (i.e., RCADS-25 and RCADS-20) seem to be feasible for administering at schools. The present study evaluated the psychometric properties of the RCADS-25 and RCADS-20 used as screening instruments for anxiety and depression in a general population of schoolchildren and adolescents.MethodsThe RCADS-25 was completed by 69,487 schoolchildren and adolescents aged 8 to 18. The RCADS-25 and RCADS-20 broad anxiety scales are equal (15 items), but there are two versions of the major depressive disorder (MDD) scale: the RCADS-25 MDD scale (10 items) and the RCADS-20 MDD scale (5 items). The three scales were assessed on structural validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and hypotheses for construct validity.ResultsThe RCADS-25/RCADS-20 broad anxiety scale demonstrated a sufficient structural validity (CFI?=?0.98, TLI?=?0.99, RMSEA?=?0.03, SRMR?=?0.03), internal consistency (alpha?=?0.82), test-retest reliability (ICC?=?0.73), criterion validity (AUC?=?0.79), and all four hypotheses concerning construct validity were confirmed. The RCADS-25 MDD scale demonstrated a sufficient test-retest reliability (ICC?=?0.70) and three out of four hypotheses concerning construct validity were confirmed, but its structural validity was suspect (CFI?=?0.89, TLI?=?0.94, RMSEA?=?0.09, SRMR?=?0.06). The RCADS-20 MDD scale demonstrated a sufficient structural validity (CFI?=?0.97, TLI?=?0.97, RMSEA?=?0.08, SRMR?=?0.04) and internal consistency (alpha?=?0.72). Two out of four hypotheses concerning construct validity were confirmed. The test-retest reliability (ICC?=?0.60) was insufficient. Since both MDD scales showed shortcomings, the shortening of the RCADS-25 MDD scale was re-examined post hoc by principal component and reliability analyses. The result was an MDD scale with seven items.ConclusionsThe RCADS-25/RCADS-20 broad anxiety scale is valid and reliable for screening schoolchildren and adolescents, but the RCADS-25 and RCADS-20 MDD scales showed shortcomings. An MDD scale of seven items showed acceptable psychometric properties.

Dataset Information

Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8: psychometric evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets