Measuring common mental disorders in women in Ethiopia: reliability and construct validity of the comprehensive psychopathological rating scale.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hanlon C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2518079 | biostudies-other | 2008 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionThe Duchenne Video Assessment (DVA) assesses quality of movement as an indication of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) disease severity. Caregivers video record patients performing home-based movement tasks using a mobile application, and physical therapists (PTs) rate the videos using scorecards with prespecified compensatory movement criteria. Reliability and construct validity of the DVA were tested using video and Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) data from patients with DMD and healthy controls from a separate study.MethodsFifteen PTs were trained and certified as DVA raters. All raters scored videos of five subjects performing each movement task; nine raters rescored the same videos four weeks later. Three raters scored videos from an average of 25 subjects for each movement task. Aggregate scores were used to test construct validity. An expert DMD clinician assigned each video to a severity group for known-groups analyses. Differences between rater scores across severity groups were tested and correlations between DVA and PODCI scores were calculated.ResultsInter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) between all 15 raters ranged from 0.70 to 0.97 for all movement tasks. Mean intra-rater reliability ICC for nine raters ranged from 0.82 to 0.98 for all movement tasks. There were statistically significant differences between known severity groups for all movement tasks. The DVA correlated strongly with related PODCI constructs of physical function and weakly with unrelated constructs.DiscussionThe DVA was found to be a reliable and valid tool for measuring quality of movement as an indication of disease severity.
| S-EPMC8361683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In schizophrenia, none of the standard anxiety measures exhibit strong psychometric properties, and all performed poorly against quality assessment criteria. Developed for the schizophrenia population, this study examined the validity and reliability of the Staden Schizophrenia Anxiety Rating Scale (S-SARS) that measures both specified and undifferentiated anxiety. Among 353 schizophrenia patients, strong correlations with anxiety parameters supported the S-SARS's convergent validity. Criterion-related validity testing yielded accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity rates of around 95%. Its discriminant validity was observed for measures of depression, psychosis, akathisia, fatigue, vigour, procrastination, behavioural inhibition and activation, and personal growth and initiative. Structural validity was found in a single-factor unidimensional model with a 0.953 factor score. Excellent results were found for internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.931; Spearman-Brown coefficient = 0.937; Guttman split-half coefficient = 0.928) and inter-rater reliability (Krippendorff's alpha = 0.852). It incurred no more than a small error of measurement whereby the observed scores were within 1.54 to 3.58 of a true score on a zero to 50 scale. These strong psychometric properties suggest that the S-SARS is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring specified and undifferentiated anxiety in schizophrenia, providing the means for the accurate measurement of anxiolytic treatment effects.
| S-EPMC9028449 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10646559 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there are no outcome measures assessing the ability of people with non-specific low back pain to self-manage their illness. Inspired by the 'Patient Enablement Instrument', we developed the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP). The aim of this study was to describe the development of the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP) and investigate content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, responsiveness and floor and ceiling effects.MethodsThe PEI-BP consists of 6 items that are rated on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale. Measurement properties were evaluated using the COSMIN taxonomy and were based on three cohorts from primary care with low back pain: The content validity cohort (N = 14) which participated in semi-structured interviews, the GLA:D® Back cohort (N = 272) and the test-retest cohort (N = 37) which both completed self-reported questionnaires. For construct validity and responsiveness, enablement was compared to disability (Oswestry Disability Index), back pain beliefs (Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire), fear avoidance (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire-physical activity), mental health (SF-36), educational level and number of previous episodes of low back pain.ResultsThe PEI-BP was found to have acceptable content validity, construct validity, reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error) and responsiveness. The Smallest Detectable Change was 10.1 points illustrating that a patient would have to change more than 1/6 of the scale range for it to be a true change. A skewed distribution towards the high scores were found at baseline indicating a potentially problematic ceiling effect in the current population.ConclusionsThe PEI-BP can be considered a valid and reliable tool to measure enablement on people seeking care for non-specific LBP. Further testing of the PEI-BP in populations with more severe LBP is recommended.Trial registrationNot applicable.
| S-EPMC8033700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cognitive functioning can be assessed with performance-based assessments such as neuropsychological tests and with interview-based assessments. Both assessment methods have the potential to assess whether treatments for schizophrenia improve clinically relevant aspects of cognitive impairment. However, little is known about the reliability, validity and treatment responsiveness of interview-based measures, especially in the context of clinical trials. Data from two studies were utilized to assess these features of the Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS). One of the studies was a validation study involving 79 patients with schizophrenia assessed at 3 academic research centers in the US. The other study was a 32-site clinical trial conducted in the US and Europe comparing the effects of encenicline, an alpha-7 nicotine agonist, to placebo in 319 patients with schizophrenia. The SCoRS interviewer ratings demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability in several different circumstances, including those that did not involve treatment (ICC> 0.90), and during treatment (ICC>0.80). SCoRS interviewer ratings were related to cognitive performance as measured by the MCCB (r=-0.35), and demonstrated significant sensitivity to treatment with encenicline compared to placebo (P<.001). These data suggest that the SCoRS has potential as a clinically relevant measure in clinical trials aiming to improve cognition in schizophrenia, and may be useful for clinical practice. The weaknesses of the SCoRS include its reliance on informant information, which is not available for some patients, and reduced validity when patient's self-report is the sole information source.
| S-EPMC4277931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveCurrent national responses to the monitoring and prevention of alcohol marketing to vulnerable populations, such as youth, typically rely on partial bans, co-regulation and industry self-regulation. Efforts to evaluate compliance with existing regulations are often cumbersome and resource intensive. We sought to develop a short questionnaire to assess compliance of alcohol advertising to existing alcohol industry self-regulated marketing codes.MethodsQuestions for the Alcohol Marketing Assessment Rating Tool (AMART) were taken from a longer rating instrument that was originally developed to detect violations of a self-regulated alcohol marketing code. Secondary analysis of data from three studies of alcohol advertisements was performed to determine the reliability and validity of AMART at detecting code violations, using the longer form as the criterion. One sample was used as an exploratory set. Two samples were used to validate the questionnaire.ResultsIn the exploratory set, the reliability of AMART was considered near perfect (kappa = 0.92). Sensitivity was 97%, and specificity was 100%. Positive predictive value (PPV) was perfect and negative predictive value (NPV) was approximately 90%. In the validation sets, reliability was considered substantial to near perfect (kappa = 0.71-0.94). Specificity and PPV remained perfect, and NPV was 86%-90%.ConclusionThe AMART is a reliable tool to detect violations of a self-regulated marketing code in alcohol advertising. It significantly decreases the amount of resources needed to evaluate a finite number of advertisements.
| S-EPMC7434202 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study is to present a short form of the I COPPE scale of multidimensional well-being. We conducted two studies, which include four samples collected across three countries, namely United States, Argentina, and Italy. In the pilot study we tested during the data analysis phase whether it was feasible to reduce the full I COPPE scale by omitting the items dealing with past well-being. Prompted by the positive results of the pilot study, we launched a final validation study with a sample of 2682 Italian people who completed the I COPPE scale short form, which is designed without items referring to past well-being. Results from a series of confirmatory factor analyses show that the I COPPE scale short form presents acceptable levels of construct validity and reliability. Moreover, the 7-factor correlated-trait model proved to be the best fit for the data. We discuss advantaged of using the I COPPE scale short form along with limitations and future recommendations.
| S-EPMC9292542 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this study was to validate the construct and reliability of an instrument to assess the work environment as a single tool based on quality of life (QL), quality of work life (QWL), and organizational climate (OC). The methodology tested the construct validity through Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and reliability through Cronbach's alpha. The EFA returned a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value of 0.917; which demonstrated that the data were adequate for the factor analysis; and a significant Bartlett's test of sphericity (χ² = 7465.349; Df = 1225; p ≤ 0.000). After the EFA; the varimax rotation method was employed for a factor through commonality analysis; reducing the 14 initial factors to 10. Only question 30 presented commonality lower than 0.5; and the other questions returned values higher than 0.5 in the commonality analysis. Regarding the reliability of the instrument; all of the questions presented reliability as the values varied between 0.953 and 0.956. Thus; the instrument demonstrated construct validity and reliability.
| S-EPMC7600521 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of the present study was to investigate the construct validity, responsiveness and reliability of the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS) in kittens.MethodsA total of 36 healthy female kittens (aged 10 weeks to 6 months) were included in a prospective, randomized, blinded study. Video recordings of all kittens were made before and 1 and 2 h after ovariohysterectomy using an opioid-free injectable anesthetic protocol with or without multimodal analgesia. Additional recordings were taken before and 1 h after administration of rescue analgesia (buprenorphine 0.02 mg/kg IM) to painful kittens. Screenshots of facial images were collected from the video recordings for FGS scoring. Four observers blinded to treatment groups and time points scored 111 randomized images twice with a 5-week interval using the FGS. Five action units (AUs) were scored (ear position, orbital tightening, muzzle tension, whiskers position and head position; 0-2 each). Construct validity, responsiveness, and inter- and intra-rater reliability were evaluated using linear models with Benjamini-Hochberg correction, Wilcoxon signed-rank test and single intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCsingle), respectively (P <0.05).ResultsFGS total ratio scores were higher at 1 and 2 h after ovariohysterectomy (median [interquartile range, IQR]: 0.30 [0.20-0.40] and 0.30 [0.20-0.40], respectively) than at baseline (median [IQR]: 0.10 [0.00-0.30]) (P <0.001). FGS total ratio scores were lower after the administration of rescue analgesia (median [IQR] before and after rescue analgesia) 0.40 [0.20-0.50] and 0.20 [0.10-0.38], respectively (P <0.001). Inter-rater ICCsingle was 0.68 for the FGS total ratio scores and 0.35-0.70 for all AUs considered individually. Intra-rater ICCsingle was 0.77-0.91 for the FGS total ratio scores and 0.55-1.00 for all AUs considered individually.Conclusions and relevanceThe FGS is a valid and responsive acute pain-scoring instrument with moderate inter-rater reliability and good to excellent intra-rater reliability in kittens.
| S-EPMC10811766 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a screening tool used to measure psychological functioning among children and adolescents. It has been extensively used worldwide, but its psychometric properties, such as internal structure and reliability, seem to vary across countries. This is the first study exploring the construct validity and reliability of the Spanish version of SDQ among early adolescents (self-reported) and their parents in Latin America. A total of 1,284 early adolescents (9-15 years) and their parents answered the SDQ. We also collected demographic variables. A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess the latent structure of the SDQ. We also used the multitrait-multimethod analysis to separate the true variance on the constructs from variance resulting from measurement methods (self-report vs. parent report), and evaluated the agreement between adolescents and their parents. We found that the original five-factor model was a good solution and the resulting sub-scales had good internal consistency. We also found that the self-reported and parental versions of SDQ provide different information, which are complementary and provide a better picture of the emotional, social, and conduct problems of adolescents. We have added evidence for the construct validity and reliability of the Spanish self-reported and parental SDQ versions in a Chilean sample.
| S-EPMC5798763 | biostudies-literature