Univariate and Multivariate Base Rates of Score Elevations, Reliable Change, and Inter-Rater Discrepancies in the BRIEF-A Standardization Samples

Assessment ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 107319112110556
Author(s):  
Stephen L. Aita ◽  
Grant G. Moncrief ◽  
Jennifer Greene ◽  
Sue Trujillo ◽  
Alicia Carrillo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Behavior Rating ◽  
Reliable Change ◽  
Informant Report ◽  
Base Rates ◽  
T Score ◽  
Behavior Rating Inventory ◽  
The Common ◽  
Highly Correlated

The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Adult Version (BRIEF-A) is a standardized rating scale of subjective executive functioning. We provide univariate and multivariate base rates (BRs) for scale/index scores in the clinical range ( T scores ≥65), reliable change, and inter-rater information not included in the Professional Manual. Participants were adults (ages = 18–90 years) from the BRIEF-A self-report ( N = 1,050) and informant report ( N = 1,200) standardization samples, as well as test–retest ( n = 50 for self, n = 44 for informant) and inter-rater ( n = 180) samples. Univariate BRs of elevated T scores were low (self-report = 3.3%–15.4%, informant report = 4.5%–16.3%). Multivariate BRs revealed the common occurrence of obtaining at least one elevated T-score across scales (self-report = 26.5%–37.3%, informant report = 22.7%–30.3%), whereas virtually none had elevated scores on all scales. Test–retest scores were highly correlated (self = .82–.94; informant = .91–.96). Inter-rater correlations ranged from .44 to .68. Significant ( p < .05) test–retest T-score differences ranged from 7 to 12 for self-report, from 6 to 8 for informant report, and from 16 to 21 points for inter-rater T-score differences. Applications of these findings are discussed.

scholarly journals A-240 Enhanced Interpretation of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Adult Version (BRIEF-A)

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 1035-1035
Author(s):  
Trujillo S ◽  
Carrillo A ◽  
Greene J ◽  
Roth R ◽  
Isquith P ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Executive Function ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Behavior Rating ◽  
Informant Report ◽  
Base Rates ◽  
T Score ◽  
Behavior Rating Inventory ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Objective The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function®—Adult Version (BRIEF-A) is a standardized measure that captures an adult’s executive functions in his or her everyday environment. The current study provides additional statistical evidence to support interpretation of BRIEF-A scores across raters and over time. Method Participants were adults, ages 18 to 90 years, from the BRIEF-A Self-Report (N = 1,050) and Informant-Report (N = 1,200) standardization samples, as well as an interrater sample (n = 180) and test–retest samples (n = 50 for Self, n = 44 for Informant). Interrater correlations, base rates of interrater differences, and score differences required for statistical significance were examined. Test–retest correlations and score differences required for statistical significance were examined. Base rates of elevated T scores (≥ 65) were calculated for the standardization samples across age groups. Results Interrater correlations ranged from .44 to .68 with an interrater difference of 17–20 T-score points considered significant at p &lt; .05. Approximately 55–73% of raters reported scores within 10 T-score points. Test–retest scores were highly correlated (Self: r = .82–.94; Informant: r = .91–.96), with a between-test difference of 7–11 T-score points considered significant at p &lt; .05. Base rates of elevated T- scores ranged from 3.3% to 15.4% for the Self-Report Form and 4.5% to 16.3% for the Informant-Report Form across the scales/indexes. Conclusions These data allow clinicians to interpret BRIEF-A scores across raters and over time by determining the statistical significance of BRIEF-A score differences, as well as quantifying the frequency of the observed differences.

Symptoms Versus Impairment in Adults With ADHD: Intercorrelations of the BRIEF-A, CAARS, and TOVA

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (13) ◽  
pp. 1557-1566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Ben-Sheetrit ◽  
Mika Zurawel ◽  
Abraham Weizman ◽  
Iris Manor
Keyword(s):  
Executive Function ◽  
Adult Adhd ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Behavior Rating ◽  
Behavioral Regulation ◽  
Behavior Rating Inventory ◽  
Inattention And Hyperactivity

Objective: The aim of this study is to explore the connections within and between three measures of adult ADHD: the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Adult Version (BRIEF-A)–Self-Report, Conners’ Adult ADHD Rating Scale–Investigator-Rated (CAARS-Inv), and Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA). Method: Data of 89 adults with ADHD (ages = 18-54, 46% females) who were assessed using these measures during pretreatment visits of a randomized study of metadoxine XR were analyzed. Results: The CAARS-Inv and TOVA did not correlate. The BRIEF-A correlated extensively with both the CAARS-Inv and TOVA, primarily via its Behavioral Regulation Index (BRI). The BRIEF-A Metacognition Index correlated with the CAARS-Inv inattentive score, while the BRI correlated with the CAARS-Inv hyperactive-impulsive score. Within the CAARS and TOVA, inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity correlated weakly. Conclusion: The measures seem to capture different aspects of adult ADHD. While the CAARS-Inv addresses mainly the domain of symptoms, and the TOVA that of impairment, the BRIEF-A captures aspects of both.

scholarly journals Establishing a common metric for patient-reported outcomes in cancer patients: linking patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS), numerical rating scale, and patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE)

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Minji K. Lee ◽  
Benjamin D. Schalet ◽  
David Cella ◽  
Kathleen J. Yost ◽  
Amy C. Dueck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Information System ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Measurement Information ◽  
Outcomes Measurement ◽  
T Score ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Measurement Information System ◽  
The Common

Abstract Background Researchers and clinicians studying symptoms experienced by people with cancer must choose from various scales. It would be useful to know how the scores on one measure translate to another. Methods Using item response theory (IRT) with the single-group design, in which the same sample answers all measures, we produced crosswalk tables linking five 0–10 numeric rating scale (NRS) and 15 items from Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE, scored on a 1–5 scale) to the T-Score metric of six different scales from the NIH Patient reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®). The constructs, for which we conducted linking, include emotional distress-anxiety, emotional distress-depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, pain intensity, and pain interference. We tested the IRT linking assumption of construct similarity between measures by comparing item content and testing unidimensionality of item sets comprising each construct. We also investigated the correlation of the measures to be linked and, by inspecting standardized mean differences, whether the linkage is invariant across age and gender subgroups. For measures that satisfied the assumptions, we conducted linking. Results In general, an NRS score of 0 corresponded to about 38.2 on the PROMIS T-Score scale (mean = 50; SD = 10); whereas an NRS score of 10 corresponded to a PROMIS T-Score of approximately 72.7. Similarly, the lowest/best score of 1 on PRO-CTCAE corresponded to 39.8 on T-score scale and the highest/worst score of 5 corresponded to 72.0. Conclusion We produced robust linking between single item symptom measures and PROMIS short forms.

The Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Clinician Rating (IDS-C) and Self-Report (IDS-SR), and the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Clinician Rating (QIDS-C) and Self-Report (QIDS-SR) in public sector patients with mood disorders: a psychometric evaluation

2004 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. H. TRIVEDI ◽  
A. J. RUSH ◽  
H. M. IBRAHIM ◽  
T. J. CARMODY ◽  
M. M. BIGGS ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Symptom Severity ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Depressive Symptomatology ◽  
Summary Score ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Energy Concentration ◽  
Clinician Rating ◽  
Highly Correlated

Background. The present study provides additional data on the psychometric properties of the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS) and of the recently developed Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), a brief 16-item symptom severity rating scale that was derived from the longer form. Both the IDS and QIDS are available in matched clinician-rated (IDS-C30; QIDS-C16) and self-report (IDS-SR30; QIDS-SR16) formats.Method. The patient samples included 544 out-patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and 402 out-patients with bipolar disorder (BD) drawn from 19 regionally and ethnicically diverse clinics as part of the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP). Psychometric analyses including sensitivity to change with treatment were conducted.Results. Internal consistencies (Cronbach's alpha) ranged from 0·81 to 0·94 for all four scales (QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, IDS-C30 and IDS-SR30) in both MDD and BD patients. Sad mood, involvement, energy, concentration and self-outlook had the highest item-total correlations among patients with MDD and BD across all four scales. QIDS-SR16 and IDS-SR30 total scores were highly correlated among patients with MDD at exit (c=0·83). QIDS-C16 and IDS-C30 total scores were also highly correlated among patients with MDD (c=0·82) and patients with BD (c=0·81). The IDS-SR30, IDS-C30, QIDS-SR16, and QIDS-C16 were equivalently sensitive to symptom change, indicating high concurrent validity for all four scales. High concurrent validity was also documented based on the SF-12 Mental Health Summary score for the population divided in quintiles based on their IDS or QIDS score.Conclusion. The QIDS-SR16 and QIDS-C16, as well as the longer 30-item versions, have highly acceptable psychometric properties and are treatment sensitive measures of symptom severity in depression.

Beliefs about medications predict adherence to antidepressants in older adults

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Waleed Fawzi ◽  
Mohamed Yousry Abdel Mohsen ◽  
Abdel Hamid Hashem ◽  
Suaad Moussa ◽  
Elizabeth Coker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Poor Response ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Poor Adherence ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Medication Side Effects ◽  
Beliefs About Medicines ◽  
Medication Side ◽  
Highly Correlated

ABSTRACTBackground: Adherence to treatment is a complex and poorly understood phenomenon. This study investigates the relationship between older depressed patients’ adherence to antidepressants and their beliefs about and knowledge of the medication.Methods: Assessment was undertaken of 108 outpatients over the age of 55 years diagnosed with depressive disorder and treated for at least four weeks with antidepressants. Adherence was assessed using two self-report measures: the Medication Adherence Rating Scale (MARS) and a Global Adherence Measure (GAM). Potential predictors of adherence investigated included sociodemographic, medication and illness variables. In addition, 33 carers were interviewed regarding general medication beliefs.Results: 56% of patients reported 80% or higher adherence on the GAM. Sociodemographic variables were not associated with adherence on the MARS. Specific beliefs about medicines, such as “my health depends on antidepressants” (necessity) and being less worried about becoming dependant on antidepressants (concern) were highly correlated with adherence. General beliefs about medicines causing harm or being overprescribed, experiencing medication side-effects and severity of depression also correlated with poor adherence. Linear regression with the MARS as the dependent variable explained 44.3% of the variance and showed adherence to be higher in subjects with healthy specific beliefs who received more information about antidepressants and worse with depression severity and autonomic side-effects.Conclusions: Our findings strongly support a role for specific beliefs about medicines in adherence. Challenging patients’ beliefs, providing information about treatment and discussing side-effects could improve adherence. Poor response to treatment and medication side-effects can indicate poor adherence and should be considered before switching medications.

Executive Functioning Outcomes Over 6 Months of Atomoxetine for Adults With ADHD: Relationship to Maintenance of Response and Relapse Over the Subsequent 6 Months After Treatment

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lenard A. Adler ◽  
Mary Solanto ◽  
Rodrigo Escobar ◽  
Sarah Lipsius ◽  
Himanshu Upadhyaya
Keyword(s):  
Executive Functioning ◽  
Adult Adhd ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Symptom Improvement ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Behavior Rating Inventory ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Controlled Clinical Study

Objective: This study examines the relationship between maintenance of improved executive functioning (EF) in adults with ADHD with long-term symptom improvement with atomoxetine. Method: Data were collected from a yearlong, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study on adult patients with ADHD receiving atomoxetine (80-100 mg/day) for 24 weeks. Patients were then randomized to continue atomoxetine or placebo for 6 months. Executive functioning was rated with Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Adult Version: Self-Report™ (BRIEF-A: Self-Report™), and the T-scores were determined. Results: Postrandomization T-scores for atomoxetine patients were significantly better than those of placebo patients (3 and 6 months postrandomization). Patients with greater improvements in EF were more likely to show worsening of EF and to relapse after atomoxetine discontinuation. The maintenance of improved EF was significantly associated with improved ADHD symptoms (Conners’ Adult ADHD Rating Scale–Investigator Rated: Screening Version [CAARS-Inv:SV] with adult prompts). Conclusion: Treatment with atomoxetine improved EF during the treatment phases. Improved EF was maintained up to 6 months after discontinuation of atomoxetine.

scholarly journals Correlation between Performance-Based and Interview-Based Cognitive Measurements in Patients with Schizophrenia

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. 695-701
Author(s):  
Dong-Wook Jeon ◽  
Do-Un Jung ◽  
Minkyung Oh ◽  
Jung-Joon Moon ◽  
Sung-Jin Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Function ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Function Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Global Score ◽  
Speed Of Processing ◽  
Evaluation Tool ◽  
T Score ◽  
Treatment Research ◽  
Highly Correlated

Objective The Measurement and Treatment Research to improve Cognition in Schizophrenia Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) is used to measure the cognitive function of patients with schizophrenia. In some situations, interview-based measures such as the Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS) may be appropriate. In this study, we analyzed the correlation between performance- and interview-based measurements in patients with schizophrenia.Methods Fifty-six clinically stable patients were recruited. To evaluate cognitive function, we used the MCCB performance-based measure and the SCoRS interview-based measure. Measurements were taken at baseline, and 2 weeks and 3 months later. Spearman correlations were computed between each SCoRS item’s interviewer rating and each MCCB score.Results The correlation between the MCCB overall T score and the SCoRS global score was the strongest (r=-0.52), while the SCoRS total score and the MCCB Speed of Processing score also correlated (r=-0.48). The SCoRS global score showed statistically significant correlations with all seven MCCB domains and the overall T score.Conclusion This study reveals correlations between MCCB domains and SCoRS items. Since we find that interview-based measurements are highly correlated with performance-based measurements, we suggest them as a useful cognitive function evaluation tool that can easily be applied in clinical settings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document