-
Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs Sep 2023Alcohol-impaired driving is a major contributor to motor vehicle crash deaths and injury. Many survey studies include self-report measures of alcohol-impaired driving,...
OBJECTIVE
Alcohol-impaired driving is a major contributor to motor vehicle crash deaths and injury. Many survey studies include self-report measures of alcohol-impaired driving, but no guidance is available to help researchers select from among available measures. The aims of this systematic review were to compile a list of measures that researchers have used previously, to compare performance between measures, and to identify the measures with highest validity and reliability.
METHOD
Literature searches of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science identified studies that assessed alcohol-impaired driving behavior through self-report. The measures from each study and, if available, indices of reliability or validity were extracted. Using the measures' text, we developed 10 codes to group similar measures and compare them. For example, the "alcohol effects" code refers to driving while feeling dizzy or lightheaded after drinking, and the "drink count" code pertains to the number of drinks someone consumed before driving. For measures with multiple items, each item was categorized separately.
RESULTS
After screening according to the eligibility criteria, 41 articles were included in the review. Thirteen articles reported on reliability. No articles reported on validity. The self-report measures with the highest reliability coefficients contained items from multiple codes, namely alcohol effects and drink count.
CONCLUSIONS
Self-report alcohol-impaired driving measures with multiple items evaluating distinct aspects of alcohol-impaired driving show better reliability than measures using a single item. Future work investigating the validity of these measures is needed to determine the best approach for conducting self-report research in this area.
Topics: Humans; Accidents, Traffic; Alcohol Drinking; Automobile Driving; Driving Under the Influence; Reproducibility of Results; Self Report; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 37096774
DOI: 10.15288/jsad.22-00435 -
Journal of Periodontology Dec 2016Periodontal disease (PdD) has been shown to be related to other systemic diseases. However, to assess this relationship, large epidemiologic studies are required. Such... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Periodontal disease (PdD) has been shown to be related to other systemic diseases. However, to assess this relationship, large epidemiologic studies are required. Such studies need validated self-report measures. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the validity of self-reported measures in the diagnosis of PdD.
METHODS
The review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched up to January 2016. Two periodontal journals were searched manually. Two reviewers independently made selected studies and extracted data. All disagreements were resolved after discussion with a third reviewer. Risk of bias was evaluated. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Of 933 papers found, 11 were selected for the review. All studies, except two, had acceptable quality. Four comparable studies were selected for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Study size ranged from 114 to 1,426 participants. Sensitivity and specificity ranged from 4% to 93% and 58% to 94%, respectively. Diagnostic odds ratio was 1.4 (95% CI: 0.9 to 2.2) for the question on bleeding gums and 11.7 (95% CI: 4.1 to 33.4) for the question on tooth mobility. Heterogeneity was low for most questions except those on painful gums and tooth mobility.
CONCLUSIONS
Self-reported PdD has acceptable validity and can be used for surveillance of PdD in large epidemiologic studies. However, there is a need for large, well-designed diagnostic studies.
Topics: Gingival Diseases; Humans; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Periodontal Diseases; Self Report
PubMed: 27523519
DOI: 10.1902/jop.2016.160196 -
Quality of Life Research : An... May 2020To identify and evaluate methods for assessing pediatric patient-reported outcome (PRO) data quality at the individual level.
PURPOSE
To identify and evaluate methods for assessing pediatric patient-reported outcome (PRO) data quality at the individual level.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature review to identify methods for detecting invalid responses to PRO measures. Eight data quality indicators were applied to child-report data collected from 1780 children ages 8-11 years. We grouped children with similar data quality patterns and tested for between-group differences in factors hypothesized to influence self-report capacity.
RESULTS
We identified 126 articles that described 494 instances in which special measures or statistical techniques were applied to evaluate data quality at the individual level. We identified 22 data quality indicator subtypes: 9 direct methods (require administration of special items) and 13 archival techniques (statistical procedures applied to PRO data post hoc). Application of archival techniques to child-report PRO data revealed 3 distinct patterns (or classes) of the data quality indicators. Compared to class 1 (56%), classes 2 (36%) and 3 (8%) had greater variation in their PRO item responses. Three archival indicators were especially useful for differentiating plausible item response variation (class 2) from statistically unlikely response patterns (class 3). Neurodevelopmental conditions, which are associated with a range of cognitive processing challenges, were more common among children in class 3.
CONCLUSION
A multi-indicator approach is needed to identify invalid PRO responses. Once identified, assessment environments and measurement tools should be adapted to best support these individuals' self-report capacity. Individual-level data quality indicators can be used to gauge the effectiveness of these accommodations.
Topics: Child; Data Accuracy; Humans; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Quality of Life; Self Report
PubMed: 31900764
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-019-02387-3 -
Psychology and Psychotherapy Dec 2018Self-criticism is a transdiagnostic process that has been attracting research and clinical interest. The accurate measurement of this construct is therefore crucial;...
PURPOSE
Self-criticism is a transdiagnostic process that has been attracting research and clinical interest. The accurate measurement of this construct is therefore crucial; however, there are currently numerous measures of self-criticism and no guidelines about which to use in different contexts. This systematic review evaluated the measurement properties of self-report questionnaires of self-criticism.
METHODS
OvidSP and Web of Science were used to search through multiple databases, and an initial grey literature search was completed. Studies were included when the main focus was to evaluate the measurement properties of English version of scales or subscales that aimed to measure self-criticism in an adult population. Both the methodological quality of included studies and the specific measurement properties were evaluated; these ratings were then combined into a best evidence synthesis.
RESULTS
Five scales and five subscales were identified, described in 16 papers. The scales were designed to measure different types of self-criticism including trait or repetitive self-criticism and self-criticism in response to difficult situations or as a mood regulation strategy. The majority of included studies were either rated as having poor methodological quality, or were given indeterminate or negative ratings for the measurement properties they reported. Questionnaire content varied depending on how the authors conceptualized self-criticism. Issues were also highlighted in relation to the checklist used to rate methodological quality.
CONCLUSIONS
Tentative recommendations were made about two measures of self-criticism based on existing evidence; future research is required. Furthermore, questionnaire choice should be based on the type of self-criticism being assessed.
PRACTITIONER POINTS
Self-criticism has been associated with a range of clinical difficulties including depression and eating disorders and is increasingly the focus of research, including treatment studies directly targeting self-criticism. Since different researchers have conceptualized self-criticism differently, a number of self-criticism self-report questionnaires have been developed that vary in terms of design, structure, and content. This systematic review identified and evaluated the measurement properties of self-report questionnaires of self-criticism and makes tentative recommendations about their use in clinical and research settings and areas for future research.
Topics: Evaluation Studies as Topic; Humans; Research Design; Self Report; Self-Assessment
PubMed: 29345799
DOI: 10.1111/papt.12171 -
Autism Research : Official Journal of... Jan 2023Interest in social camouflaging has led to a multiplicity of measurement methods of uncertain validity. This two-part investigation first used a systematic review... (Review)
Review
Interest in social camouflaging has led to a multiplicity of measurement methods of uncertain validity. This two-part investigation first used a systematic review ("Study 1") to identify and appraise methods used to quantify camouflaging of autistic traits, using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments checklist. A total of 16 distinct measurement tools were identified; all are in the preliminary phases of psychometric evaluation. The systematic review highlighted: (1) the need for parent-report tools which specifically measure camouflaging; and (2) a lack of studies looking at associations between different methods of camouflaging, which limits understanding of their validity. "Study 2" aimed to begin to address these gaps in knowledge. We created a parent-report version of the Camouflaging Autistic Traits Questionnaire (CAT-Q) and evaluated its concurrent validity in autistic young people by examining associations with the self-report CAT-Q and a discrepancy measure. Discriminant validity was investigated by comparing all three methods of measuring camouflaging to a measure of social skills, to test whether they assess a construct distinct from social ability. The self- and parent-report CAT-Q were significantly related (r = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.24-0.65), and were related weakly (r = 0.20, 95% CI = -0.06 to 0.43) and strongly (r = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.23-0.64), respectively, to the discrepancy approach. No measure was associated with social skills. Improving the psychometric properties of these methods, and introducing a novel parent-report measure, may help selection of appropriate methods in future research and integration into clinical practice.
Topics: Humans; Autistic Disorder; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Surveys and Questionnaires; Self Report; Social Skills
PubMed: 36424824
DOI: 10.1002/aur.2850 -
Journal of Sleep Research Dec 2023Insomnia nosology has significantly evolved since the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-III-R first distinguished between 'primary' and 'secondary' insomnia. Prior... (Review)
Review
Insomnia nosology has significantly evolved since the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-III-R first distinguished between 'primary' and 'secondary' insomnia. Prior International Classification of Sleep Disorders (ICSD) nosology 'split' diagnostic phenotypes to address insomnia's heterogeneity and the DSM nosology 'lumped' them into primary insomnia, while both systems assumed causality for insomnia secondary to health conditions. In this systematic review, we discuss the historical phenotypes in prior insomnia nosology, present findings for currently proposed insomnia phenotypes based on more robust approaches, and critically appraise the most relevant ones. Electronic databases PsychINFO, PubMED, Web of Science, and references of eligible articles, were accessed to find diagnostic manuals, literature on insomnia phenotypes, including systematic reviews or meta-analysis, and assessments of the reliability or validity of insomnia diagnoses, identifying 184 articles. The data show that previous insomnia diagnoses lacked reliability and validity, leading current DSM-5-TR and ICSD-3 nosology to 'lump' phenotypes into a single diagnosis comorbid with health conditions. However, at least two new, robust insomnia phenotyping approaches were identified. One approach is multidimensional-multimethod and provides evidence for self-reported insomnia with objective short versus normal sleep duration linked to clinically relevant outcomes, while the other is multidimensional and provides evidence for two to five clusters (phenotypes) based on self-reported trait, state, and/or life-history data. Some approaches still need replication to better support whether their findings identify true phenotypes or simply different patterns of symptomatology. Regardless, these phenotyping efforts aim at improving insomnia nosology both as a classification system and as a mechanism to guide treatment.
Topics: Humans; International Classification of Diseases; Phenotype; Reproducibility of Results; Self Report; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders
PubMed: 37122153
DOI: 10.1111/jsr.13910 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Feb 2016Self-harm is a major public health problem yet current healthcare provision is widely regarded as inadequate. One of the barriers to effective healthcare is the lack of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Self-harm is a major public health problem yet current healthcare provision is widely regarded as inadequate. One of the barriers to effective healthcare is the lack of a clear understanding of the functions self-harm may serve for the individual. The aim of this review is to identify first-hand accounts of the reasons for self-harm from the individual's perspective.
METHOD
A systematic review of the literature reporting first-hand accounts of the reasons for self-harm other than intent to die. A thematic analysis and 'best fit' framework synthesis was undertaken to classify the responses.
RESULTS
The most widely researched non-suicidal reasons for self-harm were dealing with distress and exerting interpersonal influence. However, many first-hand accounts included reasons such as self-validation, and self-harm to achieve a personal sense of mastery, which suggests individuals thought there were positive or adaptive functions of the act not based only on its social effects.
LIMITATIONS
Associations with different sub-population characteristics or with the method of harm were not available from most studies included in the analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Our review identified a number of themes that are relatively neglected in discussions about self-harm, which we summarised as self-harm as a positiveexperience and defining the self. These self-reported "positive" reasons may be important in understanding and responding especially to repeated acts of self-harm.
Topics: Humans; Intention; Interpersonal Relations; Self Report; Self-Injurious Behavior; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 26655120
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.11.043 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... Jul 2016To identify the self-administered instruments to assess mobility in adults with disability, to link the mobility assessed by these instruments to the International... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To identify the self-administered instruments to assess mobility in adults with disability, to link the mobility assessed by these instruments to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), and to evaluate their methodological quality.
DATA SOURCES
Scopus, Science Direct, and Web of Science were systematically searched up to July 2015.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies on the development and validation of self-administered questionnaires in which at least half of the items were related to movement or mobility were included.
DATA EXTRACTION
The mobility assessed by the instruments was classified according to the ICF categories. The methodological quality was assessed according to the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments checklist.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Of 5791 articles, 34 studies were eligible for inclusion. Only 10 of the instruments contained items that exclusively assessed mobility. The most frequently linked ICF categories were "changing basic body position" (19.4%), "walking" (14.8%), and "moving around" (13.5%). Measurement properties evaluated included internal consistency (5 studies), reliability (5 studies), measurement error (1 study), content validity (9 studies), structural validity (4 studies), hypotheses testing (6 studies), and responsiveness (1 study). Only content validity obtained the highest quality, probably because the studies included in the review reported the development and initial validation of the instruments.
CONCLUSIONS
Self-administered mobility questionnaires published in the scientific literature assess mobility activities rather than functions related to movement, and do so from the perspective of disability, frequently including self-care and domestic life as domains for assessment. The instruments that presented the highest methodological quality were the Outpatient Physical Therapy Improvement in Movement Assessment Log, the Movement Ability Measure, and the Mobility Activities Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation Settings.
Topics: Disability Evaluation; Disabled Persons; Humans; Mobility Limitation; Physical Therapy Modalities; Reproducibility of Results; Self Report
PubMed: 26898389
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.01.025 -
PloS One 2022Oral health is a key factor of overall health and closely associated with well-being and quality of life. Mastication is one the most important oral functions and may... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Oral health is a key factor of overall health and closely associated with well-being and quality of life. Mastication is one the most important oral functions and may deteriorate with aging. Evidence on association between masticatory dysfunction and frailty in the literature is scarce and not coherent.
METHODS
A search strategy was developed to conduct a systematic review of the literature in PubMed, CINAHL, and AMED in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We searched for studies published in 2000 or later that examined associations between self-reported masticatory dysfunction and frailty risk. The reference lists of the relevant articles were reviewed for additional studies. We calculated pooled odds ratios (OR) of association between self-reported masticatory dysfunction and the risk of frailty by fixed-effects meta-analysis. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist was used to assess risk of bias. Publication bias was assessed by visually inspecting a funnel plot.
RESULTS
A total of 285 studies were identified by the literature search. Among 5 studies selected for this review, 4 cross-sectional studies including a total of 7425 individuals were used for meta-analysis. The pooled results by a fixed-effects model showed that there was a significant association between self-reported masticatory dysfunction and frailty risk (pooled OR = 1.83, 95%CI = 1.55-2.18, p<0.00001). There was no evidence of publication bias observed.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted pooled cross-sectional evidence that community-dwelling older people who report masticatory dysfunction are significantly more likely to be frail than those who do not. The limitations of this study are: inclusion of only cross-sectional studies, no gold standard to measure masticatory functions, self-reported information on masticatory function, and the limited number of included studies. More longitudinal studies are warranted for further understanding of the causal pathways and elucidate underlying mechanisms. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021277173.
Topics: Aged; Cross-Sectional Studies; Frail Elderly; Frailty; Humans; Quality of Life; Self Report
PubMed: 36084116
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273812 -
Musculoskeletal Science & Practice Oct 2017Rising healthcare costs and inherent risks with over-utilizing diagnostic imaging require a quality subjective examination to improve effectiveness and time management... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Rising healthcare costs and inherent risks with over-utilizing diagnostic imaging require a quality subjective examination to improve effectiveness and time management of physical examinations. This systematic review investigates the diagnostic accuracy of subjective history and self-report items to determine if there is significant alteration in the probability of identifying specific painful neck conditions. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed.
INCLUSION CRITERIA
1) Written in the English language 2) Cervical pain with/without referred upper extremity or head pain 3) Subjective history or self-report items 4) Study designs that reported diagnostic statistics or allowed calculation of sensitivities, specificities, diagnostic odds ratios, and likelihood ratios 5) used a reference standard that has a sensitivity or specificity ≥75% or a diagnostic tool that is strongly supported in the literature where this data is not available. Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy II was performed to evaluate risk of bias. Five studies with 830 total patients met the inclusion criteria. Conditions commonly reported in the literature included: cervical radiculopathy, cervical myelopathy, degenerative joint disease, and cervicogenic headache. Individual history questions show minimal diagnostic value in identifying cervical conditions without the physical examination. The value of the subjective history report is important and requires further investigation for specific neck conditions. Clustering symptoms may provide more insight than individual history items in future studies. The diagnostic value of history for neck conditions may be underrepresented due to the lack of studies that isolate subjective examination from the physical examination.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
3a.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Diagnostic Tests, Routine; Female; Humans; Male; Medical History Taking; Middle Aged; Neck Pain; Pain Measurement; Self Report; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 28644963
DOI: 10.1016/j.msksp.2017.06.002