-
Cognitive Processing Feb 2021Psychometric, historiometric and psychiatric studies are controversial on a hypothetical link between psychopathology and creativity. In this study, we will try to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Psychometric, historiometric and psychiatric studies are controversial on a hypothetical link between psychopathology and creativity. In this study, we will try to contribute to this debate by analysing the case of autism. Is there a relationship between autism and creativity? If so, can we find the same relationship in a watered-down form in subjects with autistic traits? In order to answer these questions, we carried out a systematic literature review of the studies on this topic published in the last 10 years. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We also conducted a meta-analysis of data. We found that in the clinical population there are fewer creative performances than in control groups; nonetheless, it is possible to delineate a medium creative profile of subjects with autism. The average creative profile of people with autism shows that they are inhibited in fluency and flexibility, but that they display a high level of detail and a particularly high level of originality in works either generated during tests or created in private time. In particular, the level of detail reached in the latter condition seems to be higher in the autistic population than in the control groups. Better linguistic skills appear to be linked to better creative performances. Linguistic tests, if compared with visual and performative tests, seem to favour the expression of originality in subjects with autism. Although our data on autistic traits are compatible with the hypothesis that a high level of autistic traits is a watered-down replica of the cognitive profile of subjects with autism, we have no sufficient data to support this hypothesis.
Topics: Autistic Disorder; Creativity; Humans; Psychometrics
PubMed: 33057954
DOI: 10.1007/s10339-020-00992-6 -
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management Jan 2022The Dyspnoea-12 (D-12) and Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile (MDP) were specifically developed for assessment of multiple sensations of breathlessness. (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
The Dyspnoea-12 (D-12) and Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile (MDP) were specifically developed for assessment of multiple sensations of breathlessness.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review aimed to identify the use and measurement properties of the D-12 and MDP across populations, settings and languages.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched for primary studies (2008-2020) reporting use of the D-12 or MDP in adults. Two independent reviewers completed screening and data extraction. Study and participant characteristics, instrument use, reported scores and minimal clinical important differences (MCID) were evaluated. Data on internal consistency (Cronbach's α) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC) were pooled using random effects models between settings and languages.
RESULTS
A total 75 publications reported use of D-12 (n = 35), MDP (n = 37) or both (n = 3), reflecting 16 chronic conditions. Synthesis confirmed two factor structure, internal consistency (Cronbach's α mean, 95% CI: D-12 Total = 0.93, 0.91-0.94; MDP Immediate Perception [IP] = 0.88, 0.85-0.90; MDP Emotional Response [ER] = 0.86, 0.82-0.89) and 14 day test-rest reliability (ICC: D-12 Total = 0.91, 0.88-0.94; MDP IP = 0.85, 0.70-0.93; MDP ER = 0.84, 0.73-0.90) across settings and languages. MCID estimates for clinical interventions ranged between -3 and -6 points (D-12 Total) with small variability in scores over 2 weeks (D-12 Total 2.8 (95% CI: 2.0 to 3.7), MDP-A1 0.8 (0.6 to 1.1) and six months (D-12 Total 2.9 (2.0 to 3.7), MDP-A1 0.8 (0.6 to 1.1)).
CONCLUSION
D-12 and MDP are widely used, reliable, valid and responsive across various chronic conditions, settings and languages, and could be considered standard instruments for measuring dimensions of breathlessness in international trials.
Topics: Adult; Dyspnea; Emotions; Humans; Language; Psychometrics; Reproducibility of Results; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 34273524
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.06.023 -
Quality of Life Research : An... Sep 2018The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) in various shoulder pathologies, based on a systematic review... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) in various shoulder pathologies, based on a systematic review and expert standardized evaluations.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Titles and abstracts were reviewed and finally the included articles were grouped according to patients' pathologies. Two expert evaluators independently assessed the CMS properties of reliability, validity, responsiveness to change, interpretability and burden score in each group, using the EMPRO (Evaluating Measures of Patient Reported Outcomes) tool. The CMS properties were assessed per attribute and overall for each considered group. Only the concept and measurement model was assessed globally.
RESULTS
Five individual pathologies (i.e. subacromial, fractures, arthritis, instability and frozen shoulder) and two additional groups (i.e. various pathologies and healthy subjects) were considered. Overall EMPRO scores ranged from 58.6 for subacromial to 30.6 points for instability. Responsiveness to change was the only quality to obtain at least 50 points across all groups, but for frozen shoulder. Insufficient information was obtained in relation to the concept and measurement model and great variability was seen in the other evaluated attributes.
CONCLUSIONS
The current evidence does not support the CMS as a gold standard in shoulder evaluation. Its use is advisable for subacromial pathology; but data are inconclusive for other shoulder conditions. Prospective studies exploring the psychometric properties of the scale, particularly for fractures, arthritis, instability and frozen shoulder are needed.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Systematic review.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Psychometrics; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Shoulder; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 29748823
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-018-1875-7 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Jul 2021Hoarding disorder (HD) affects approximately 2.5% of the general population, leads to significant distress and impairment, and is notoriously difficult to treat. The... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hoarding disorder (HD) affects approximately 2.5% of the general population, leads to significant distress and impairment, and is notoriously difficult to treat. The crux of developing effective treatments for HD is our ability to reliably and validly measure relevant constructs in HD to better understand its presentation and, subsequently, formulate appropriate interventions.
METHODS
We identified measures specific to HD and evaluated their psychometric properties using rating criteria formulated by the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) group.
RESULTS
The 17 included measures were developed to assess adult and pediatric hoarding severity, functional impairment, and maladaptive processes (e.g., material scrupulosity). The Saving Inventory-Revised, the most widely used measure of HD severity showed the strongest psychometric properties. However, psychometric investigations were generally of poor quality across all measures and results indicated unsatisfactory performance of measures.
LIMITATIONS
The current review excluded non-English measures and ratings inherently contain some element of subjectivity despite use of predetermined criteria and two independent reviewers.
CONCLUSIONS
We suggest that clinical researchers continue to develop and modify measures used to conceptualize and, ultimately, improve treatment for HD.
Topics: Adult; Child; Consensus; Hoarding; Hoarding Disorder; Humans; Psychometrics; Self Report
PubMed: 33993080
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.04.082 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research Oct 2020Medication adherence is essential for improving the health outcomes of patients. Various patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed to measure...
BACKGROUND
Medication adherence is essential for improving the health outcomes of patients. Various patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed to measure medication adherence in patients. However, no study has summarized the psychometric properties of these PROMs to guide selection for use in clinical practice or research.
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to evaluate the quality of the PROMs used to measure medication adherence.
METHODS
This study was guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Relevant articles were retrieved from the EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases. The PROMs were then evaluated based on the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines.
RESULTS
A total of 121 unique medication adherence PROMs from 214 studies were identified. Hypotheses testing for construct validity and internal consistency were the most frequently assessed measurement properties. PROMs with at least a moderate level of evidence for ≥5 measurement properties include the Adherence Starts with Knowledge 20, Compliance Questionnaire-Rheumatology, General Medication Adherence Scale, Hill-Bone Scale, Immunosuppressant Therapy Barrier Scale, Medication Adherence Reasons Scale (MAR-Scale) revised, 5-item Medication Adherence Rating Scale (MARS-5), 9-item MARS (MARS-9), 4-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-4), 8-item MMAS (MMAS-8), Self-efficacy for Appropriate Medication Adherence Scale, Satisfaction with Iron Chelation Therapy, Test of Adherence to Inhalers, and questionnaire by Voils. The MAR-Scale revised, MMAS-4, and MMAS-8 have been administered electronically.
CONCLUSIONS
This study identified 121 PROMs for medication adherence and provided synthesized evidence for the measurement properties of these PROMs. The findings from this study may assist clinicians and researchers in selecting suitable PROMs to assess medication adherence.
Topics: Humans; Medication Adherence; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Psychometrics; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 33034566
DOI: 10.2196/19179 -
Neurological Sciences : Official... Nov 2022Psychometric instruments assessing behavioural and functional outcomes (BFIs) in neurological, geriatric and psychiatric populations are relevant towards diagnostics,... (Review)
Review
Psychometrics, diagnostics and usability of Italian tools assessing behavioural and functional outcomes in neurological, geriatric and psychiatric disorders: a systematic review.
BACKGROUND
Psychometric instruments assessing behavioural and functional outcomes (BFIs) in neurological, geriatric and psychiatric populations are relevant towards diagnostics, prognosis and intervention. However, BFIs often happen not to meet methodological-statistical standards, thus lowering their level of recommendation in clinical practice and research. This work thus aimed at (1) providing an up-to-date compendium on psychometrics, diagnostics and usability of available Italian BFIs and (2) delivering evidence-based information on their level of recommendation.
METHODS
This review was pre-registered (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021295430) and performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Several psychometric, diagnostic and usability measures were addressed as outcomes. Quality assessment was performed via an ad hoc checklist, the Behavioural and Functional Instrument Quality Assessment.
RESULTS
Out of an initial N = 830 reports, 108 studies were included (N = 102 BFIs). Target constructs included behavioural/psychiatric symptoms, quality of life and physical functioning. BFIs were either self- or caregiver-/clinician-report. Studies in clinical conditions (including neurological, psychiatric and geriatric ones) were the most represented. Validity was investigated for 85 and reliability for 80 BFIs, respectively. Criterion and factorial validity testing were infrequent, whereas content and ecological validity and parallel forms were almost never addressed. Item response theory analyses were seldom carried out. Diagnostics and norms lacked for about one-third of BFIs. Information on administration time, ease of use and ceiling/floor effects were often unreported.
DISCUSSION
Several available BFIs for the Italian population do not meet adequate statistical-methodological standards, this prompting a greater care from researchers involved in their development.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Psychometrics; Reproducibility of Results; Quality of Life; Mental Disorders; Italy
PubMed: 35932375
DOI: 10.1007/s10072-022-06300-8 -
Psychological Assessment Jun 2015The use of measures of suicidal ideation and behavior with sound measurement properties is critical in identifying people most at risk of suicide. In particular, brief... (Review)
Review
The use of measures of suicidal ideation and behavior with sound measurement properties is critical in identifying people most at risk of suicide. In particular, brief self-report measures of suicidal ideation and behaviors are needed for use in large-scale population-based research and in the development and evaluation of suicide prevention programs in the community. This review aimed to identify and recommend psychometrically sound self-report measures of suicidal ideation and behaviors that could be used in population-based research of adults. To identify existing self-report measures for adult use, a systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online) and PsycINFO (Psychological Information Database) databases. Abstracts, reference lists, and previous review papers were screened. Once measures were identified, we used a hierarchical criterion-based approach to assess their utility, psychometric properties, and appropriateness for population-based research. Nineteen measures were evaluated against 6 criteria. Three brief measures that met all criteria of the evaluation and demonstrated adequate psychometric properties were the Depressive Symptom Index Suicidality Subscale (DSI-SS), Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R), and Suicidal Ideation Attributes Scale (SIDAS). None of the comprehensive measures met all criteria for use in population-based studies, due to financial costs imposed on use, although the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (BSSI) and the Adult Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire (ASIQ) had considerable evidence of psychometric robustness. Suicide researchers are encouraged to further establish the validity of scores on these measures across diverse adult populations.
Topics: Depression; Humans; Psychometrics; Research Design; Residence Characteristics; Self Report; Suicidal Ideation; Suicide; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 25496086
DOI: 10.1037/pas0000053 -
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes Jan 2016To systematically review and examine the psychometric properties of established resilience scales in older adults, i.e. ≥60 years. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review and examine the psychometric properties of established resilience scales in older adults, i.e. ≥60 years.
METHODS
A systematic review of Scopus and Web of Science databases was undertaken using the search strategy "resilience" AND (ageing OR aging)". Independent title/abstract and fulltext screening were undertaken, identifying original peer-reviewed English articles that conducted psychometric validation studies of resilience metrics in samples aged ≥60 years. Data on the reliability/validity of the included metrics were extracted from primary studies.
RESULTS
Five thousand five hundred nine studies were identified by the database search, 426 used resilience psychometrics, and six psychometric analysis studies were included in the final analysis. These studies conducted analyses of the Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) and its shortened 10-item version (CD-RISC10), the Resilience Scale (RS) and its shortened 5- (RS-5) and 11- (RS-11) item versions, and the Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS). All scales demonstrated acceptable levels of internal consistency, convergent/discriminant validity and theoretical construct validity. Factor structures for the RS, RS-11 and CD-RISC diverged from the structures in the original studies.
CONCLUSION
The RS, RS-5, RS-11, CD-RISC, CD-RISC10 and BRCS demonstrate psychometric robustness adequate for continued use in older populations. However, results from the current study and pre-existing theoretical construct validity studies most strongly support the use of the RS, with modest and preliminary support for the CD-RISC and BRCS, respectively. Future studies assessing the validity of these metrics in older populations, particularly with respect to factor structure, would further strengthen the case for the use of these scales.
Topics: Adaptation, Psychological; Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aging; Attitude to Health; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Psychometrics; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Resilience, Psychological; Sex Factors; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 26821587
DOI: 10.1186/s12955-016-0418-6 -
International Journal of Environmental... Mar 2021This paper reviews the three most commonly used measures of loneliness for children and adolescents (children: Loneliness and Aloneness Scale for Children and... (Review)
Review
This paper reviews the three most commonly used measures of loneliness for children and adolescents (children: Loneliness and Aloneness Scale for Children and Adolescents [LACA] and Children's Loneliness and Social Dissatisfaction Scale [CLS]; adolescents: UCLA Loneliness Scale [UCLA] and LACA). Loneliness is a pertinent issue across populations and affects the mental health and academic achievement of children and adolescents. To date, there has been no thorough examination of the loneliness measures for this age group. We examine how each of the three measures was developed, and assess the psychometric properties of those measures, gaining insight into whether they are valid and reliable assessments of loneliness. Results suggest that the UCLA Loneliness Scale is the most popular measure of loneliness for use with adolescents, but it does not have robust psychometric properties for that group. For children, the CLS appears most suitable. Results of the review identify gaps in aspects of measure development, with no measure having been developed with children or adolescents. Implications for future loneliness measurement research are considered.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Humans; Loneliness; Psychometrics
PubMed: 33810076
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18063285 -
BMC Public Health Feb 2024The Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale and its short-form were developed in Canada and have been used internationally among numerous maternal populations. However, the...
BACKGROUND
The Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale and its short-form were developed in Canada and have been used internationally among numerous maternal populations. However, the psychometric properties of the scales have not been reviewed to confirm their appropriateness in measuring breastfeeding self-efficacy in culturally diverse populations. The purpose of this research was to critically appraise and synthesize the psychometric properties of the scales via systematic review.
METHODS
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Three databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO) were searched from 1999 (original publication of the Scale) until April 27, 2022. The search was updated on April 1, 2023. Studies that assessed the psychometric properties of the BSES or BSES-SF were included. Two researchers independently extracted data and completed the quality appraisals.
RESULTS
Forty-one studies evaluated the psychometrics of the BSES (n = 5 studies) or BSES-SF (n = 36 studies) among demographically or culturally diverse populations. All versions of the instrument demonstrated good reliability, with Cronbach's alphas ranging from .72 to .97. Construct validity was supported by statistically significant differences in mean scores among women with and without previous breastfeeding experience and by correlations between the scales and theoretically related constructs. Predictive validity was demonstrated by statistically significant lower scores among women who ultimately discontinued breastfeeding compared to those who did not.
CONCLUSION
The BSES and BSES-SF appear to be valid and reliable measures of breastfeeding self-efficacy that may be used globally to (1) assess women who may be at risk of negative breastfeeding outcomes (e.g., initiation, duration and exclusivity), (2) individualize breastfeeding support, and (3) evaluate the effectiveness of breastfeeding interventions.
Topics: Female; Humans; Psychometrics; Breast Feeding; Self Efficacy; Reproducibility of Results; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 38419045
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-17805-6