Test-Retest Reliability of the Holyoake Codependency Index with Australian Students

2004 ◽  
Vol 94 (2) ◽  
pp. 482-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg E. Dear
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Full Scale Test ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
External Focus ◽  
Scale Test ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Report Measure

The Holyoake Codependency Index is a 13-item self-report measure of three aspects of codependency: External Focus, Self-sacrifice, and a sense of being overwhelmed by another person's problematic behavior (termed Reactivity). Previous studies have supported internal validity and the internal consistency and construct validity of the subscales. The present scores for 59 students indicate full scale test-retest reliability of .88 and for subscales (.76 to .82) over a 3-wk. interval.

scholarly journals Reliability and Construct Validity of Self-Report Questionnaires for Patients With Pelvic Girdle Pain

2012 ◽  
Vol 92 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margreth Grotle ◽  
Andrew M. Garratt ◽  
Hanne Krogstad Jenssen ◽  
Britt Stuge
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Pelvic Girdle ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Pelvic Girdle Pain ◽  
Consistency Test ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Background There is little evidence for the measurement properties of instruments commonly used for women with pelvic girdle pain. Objective The aim of this study was to examine the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of instruments used for women with pelvic girdle pain. Design This was a cross-sectional methodology study, including test-retest reliability assessment. Methods Women with pelvic girdle pain in pregnancy and after delivery participated in a postal survey that included the Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire (PGQ), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Disability Rating Index (DRI), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and 8-item version of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36). Test-retest reliability was assessed with a random subsample 1 week later. Internal consistency was assessed with the Cronbach alpha, and test-retest reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Construct validity based on hypotheses was assessed by correlation analysis. Discriminant validity was assessed with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results All participants responded to the main (N=87) and test-retest (n=42) surveys. Cronbach alpha values ranged from .88 to .94, and ICCs ranged from .78 to .94. The MDC at the individual level constituted about 7% to 14% of total scores for the 8-item version of the SF-36, ODI, and PGQ activity subscale; about 18% to 22% for the DRI, PGQ symptom subscale, and PCS; and about 25% for the FABQ. Hypotheses were mostly confirmed by correlations between the instruments. The PGQ was the only instrument that significantly discriminated participants who were pregnant from participants who were not pregnant as well as pain locations. Limitations A comparison of responsiveness to change of the various instruments used in this study was not undertaken, but will be carried out in a future study. Conclusions Self-report instruments for assessing health showed good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity for women with pelvic girdle pain. The PGQ was the only instrument with satisfactory discriminant validity, thus, it is recommended for evaluating symptoms and disability in patients with pelvic girdle pain.

scholarly journals The Chinese version of the American shoulder and elbow surgeons standardized shoulder assessment form questionnaire, patient self-report section: a cross-cultural adaptation and validation study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tung-Hee Albert Tie ◽  
Chih-Kai Hong ◽  
Illich Chua ◽  
Fa-Chuan Kuan ◽  
Wei-Ren Su ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Cultural Adaptation ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Chinese Version ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Cross Cultural Adaptation ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background The patient self-report section of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASESp) is one of the most validated and reliable assessment tools. This study aimed to establish a validated Chinese version of ASESp (ASESp-CH). Methods A clinical prospective study was performed (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04755049; registered on 2021/02/11). Following the guidelines of forward-backward translation and cross-cultural adaptation, a Chinese version of ASESp was established. Patients older than 18 years with shoulder disorders were included. Patients who could not complete test-retest questionnaires within the interval of 7–30 days and patients who received interventions were excluded. Intraclass correlation (ICC) was calculated for test- retest reliability, whereas internal consistency was determined by Cronbach value. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing the corresponding domains between the ASESp-CH and a validated Chinese version of 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Results A total of 86 patients were included with a mean test-retest interval of 12 ± 5.4 days. Test-retest reliability was excellent with an ICC of 0.94. Good internal consistency was found, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.86. Construct validity of the ASESp-CH questionnaire was good. The major domains of the ASESp-CH were significantly correlated with the respective domains in the SF-36 (p <  0.01), except for the domain of stability of ASESp-CH. Conclusions The Chinese version of ASESp questionnaire is a highly validated and reliable tool for shoulder disorder assessment.

scholarly journals Development and cross-cultural testing of the International Depression Symptom Scale (IDSS): a measurement instrument designed to represent global presentations of depression

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. E. Haroz ◽  
J. Bass ◽  
C. Lee ◽  
S. S. Oo ◽  
K. Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Depression Symptom ◽  
Symptom Scale ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

BackgroundSelf-report measurement instruments are commonly used to screen for mental health disorders in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC). The Western origins of most depression instruments may constitute a bias when used globally. Western measures based on the DSM, do not fully capture the expression of depression globally. We developed a self-report scale design to address this limitation, the International Depression Symptom Scale-General version (IDSS-G), based on empirical evidence of the signs and symptoms of depression reported across cultures. This paper describes the rationale and process of its development and the results of an initial test among a non-Western population.MethodsWe evaluated internal consistency reliability, test–retest reliability and inter-rater reliability of the IDSS-G in a sample N = 147 male and female attendees of primary health clinics in Yangon, Myanmar. For criterion validity, IDSS-G scores were compared with diagnosis by local psychiatrists using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID). Construct validity was evaluated by investigating associations between the IDSS-G and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), impaired function, and suicidal ideation.ResultsThe IDSS-G showed high internal consistency reliability (α = 0.92), test–retest reliability (r = 0.87), and inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.90). Strong correlations between the IDSS-G and PHQ-9, functioning, and suicidal ideation supported construct validity. Criterion validity was supported for use of the IDSS-G to identify people with a SCID diagnosed depressive disorder (major depression/dysthymia). The IDSS-G also demonstrated incremental validity by predicting functional impairment beyond that predicted by the PHQ-9. Results suggest that the IDSS-G accurately assesses depression in this population. Future testing in other populations will follow.

scholarly journals Psychometric properties of the Suicidal Ideation Attributes Scale (SIDAS) in a longitudinal sample of people experiencing non-affective psychosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamelia Harris ◽  
Gillian Haddock ◽  
Sarah Peters ◽  
Patricia Gooding
Keyword(s):  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Suicide Ideation ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Affective Psychosis ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
High Internal Consistency ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background Suicidal ideation is a key precursor for suicide attempts and suicide deaths. Performing routine screening of suicide precursors can help identify people who are at high risk of death by suicide. This is, arguably, an important suicide prevention effort. The aim of this study was to assess the validity, reliability, and factor structure of the Suicidal Ideation Attributes Scale (SIDAS) in a three-month longitudinal study with people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or non-affective psychosis and experiences of suicidal ideation and/or behaviours. It was predicted that the SIDAS would have high internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent, discriminant and construct validity. Methods Ninety-nine participants experiencing psychosis completed the SIDAS at baseline and 89 participants completed it 3 months later. Additionally, participants completed a demographic questionnaire, the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation, the Beck Hopelessness Scale, and the Defeat and Entrapment Scales. The internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the SIDAS were investigated in comparison to other constructs. Factor analysis was performed to examine the factor structure of the scale. Results Principal component analysis yielded a theoretically coherent one-dimensional factor structure of SIDAS, suggesting good construct validity (PCA = .71). The SIDAS had high internal consistency (α = .89) and good test-retest reliability (α = .73). It was highly correlated with other self-report measures, including the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation, Beck Hopelessness Scale, Defeat and Entrapment scales, indicating excellent construct validity. Conclusion The SIDAS is a valid and reliable self-report instrument for assessing the severity of suicidal ideation in a population of people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or non-affective psychosis. Further research should test the psychometric properties of the scale in individuals experiencing different mental health problems in cross-cultural settings, in order to establish its broader validity, reliability, and clinical utility.

Validity and Reliability of the German Quality of Life–Alzheimer’s Disease (QoL-AD) Self-Report Scale

2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (2) ◽  
pp. 581-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Stypa ◽  
Peter Haussermann ◽  
Tim Fleiner ◽  
Sandra Neumann
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Background: The Quality of Life–Alzheimer’s Disease (QoL-AD) scale is a widely used measure of quality of life (QoL) in dementia. Although the instrument has been validated in several languages, the psychometric properties of the German self-report version have not yet been analyzed. Objective: This study examines the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of the German QoL-AD self-report scale. Methods: The sample included 30 patients suffering from mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease or vascular dementia (19 females; mean age 77.3 years; mean Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score 19.7 points). To determine test-retest reliability, the QoL-AD self-report scale was re-administered four to seven days apart. For construct validity analysis, the Dementia Quality of Life instrument (DQoL), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), MMSE, and an adapted short form of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) were used. Results: The German QoL-AD self-report scale shows an internal consistency of α= 0.79 and a test-retest reliability of r = 0.75 (p < 0.01). Regarding construct validity, there was a significant positive correlation between the total scores of the QoL-AD and DQoL (r = 0.47, p < 0.05). The analysis revealed no significant correlations with the GDS or the adapted NPI. No association could be observed between the QoL-AD and the MMSE (r = 0.01), confirming divergent validity. Conclusion: The results indicate that the German QoL-AD self-report scale is a suitable instrument for assessing QoL in patients suffering from mild to moderate dementia, thus supporting its use in clinical practice and research.

scholarly journals Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Fremantle Knee Awareness Questionnaire in Italian subjects with painful knee osteoarthritis

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Monticone ◽  
Cristiano Sconza ◽  
Igor Portoghese ◽  
Tomohiko Nishigami ◽  
Benedict M. Wand ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Structural Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Pain Catastrophising ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Painful Knee

Abstract Background and aim Growing attention is being given to utilising physical function measures to better understand and manage knee osteoarthritis (OA). The Fremantle Knee Awareness Questionnaire (FreKAQ), a self-reported measure of body-perception specific to the knee, has never been validated in Italian patients. The aims of this study were to culturally adapt and validate the Italian version of the FreKAQ (FreKAQ-I), to allow for its use with Italian-speaking patients with painful knee OA. Methods The FreKAQ-I was developed by means of forward–backward translation, a final review by an expert committee and a test of the pre-final version to evaluate its comprehensibility. The psychometric testing included: internal structural validity by Rasch analysis; construct validity by assessing hypotheses of FreKAQ correlations with the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), a pain intensity numerical rating scale (PI-NRS), the pain catastrophising scale (PCS), and the Hospital anxiety and depression score (HADS) (Pearson’s correlations); known-group validity by evaluating the ability of FreKAQ scores to discriminate between two groups of participants with different clinical profiles (Mann–Whitney U test); reliability by internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC2.1); and measurement error by calculating the minimum detectable change (MDC). Results It took one month to develop a consensus-based version of the FreKAQ-I. The questionnaire was administered to 102 subjects with painful knee OA and was well accepted. Internal structural validity confirmed the substantial unidimensionality of the FreKAQ-I: variance explained was 53.3%, the unexplained variance in the first contrast showed an eigenvalue of 1.8, and no local dependence was detected. Construct validity was good as all of the hypotheses were met; correlations: KOOS (rho = 0.38–0.51), PI-NRS (rho = 0.35–0.37), PCS (rho = 0.47) and HADS (Anxiety rho = 0.36; Depression rho = 0.43). Regarding known-groups validity, FreKAQ scores were significantly different between groups of participants demonstrating high and low levels of pain intensity, pain catastrophising, anxiety, depression and the four KOOS subscales (p ≤ 0.004). Internal consistency was acceptable (α = 0.74) and test–retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.92, CI 0.87–0.94). The MDC95 was 5.22 scale points. Conclusion The FreKAQ-I is unidimensional, reliable and valid in Italian patients with painful knee OA. Its use is recommended for clinical and research purposes.

Validation of the Beliefs of Physical Activity among Clergy (B-PAC) Instrument

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon Gwin ◽  
Paul Branscum ◽  
E. Laurette Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Reliable Instrument ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

The purpose of this study was to create a valid and reliable instrument to evaluate theory-basedbeliefs towards physical activity among clergy members. Data were collected from 174 clergy that par-ticipated in a 15-item online and paper-based survey. Psychometric properties of the instrument includedconfirmatory factor analysis (construct validity), and cronbach’s alpha (internal consistency reliability).In addition, the stability (test-retest reliability) of each subscale was evaluated with a sub-sample of 30participants. Results show the instrument was both valid and reliable, and will be useful in future studiestargeting this population. Future implications are discussed.

Psychometric properties of patient reported outcome (PRO) instruments in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in RESILIENT part 1.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e24027-e24027
Author(s):  
Jaba Kokhreidze ◽  
Veleka Allen ◽  
Cristina Ivanescu ◽  
Xiaopan Valerie Yao ◽  
Bin Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Pro Instruments

e24027 Background: The ongoing two-part phase 2/3 RESILIENT study (NCT03088813) is investigating the efficacy and safety of liposomal irinotecan monotherapy in patients with SCLC who have progressed on or after first line platinum-based chemotherapy. This exploratory analysis from RESILIENT part 1 was conducted to confirm the psychometric properties of established PRO instruments that had not previously been validated in patients with SCLC. Methods: Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) Core 30 (C30) and the EORTC QLQ Lung Cancer 13 (LC13) before treatment assignment (baseline), every 6 weeks thereafter, at treatment discontinuation and at the 30-day follow-up visit. Psychometric methods included descriptive statistics (items and scales), correlations (item-to-item and item-to-total), internal consistency (Cronbach’s α), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], two-way random effects model), construct validity and sensitivity to change. The analysis included patients who received at least one dose of study drug and completed at least one PRO assessment. Results: Thirty patients were enrolled in RESILIENT part 1 and included in the analysis. At baseline, 68% of patients reported ‘not severe’ or ‘mild’ symptoms. Floor effects (i.e. more than 25% of responses of ‘not at all’) were observed for several of the functioning/impact and symptom scales of the EORTC QLQ C30 and LC13. Moderate to strong correlations were found among most questionnaire items within their respective scales. Acceptable evidence for internal consistency and good test-retest reliability were observed. Selected results for the EORTC QLQ LC13, including dyspnea scales, are shown in the Table. The magnitude of correlations among PRO instruments supported evidence for convergent validity in this sample. Conclusions: In RESILIENT part 1, patients experienced low and tolerable symptoms at enrollment, limiting the potential for further improvement. Overall, these PRO instruments had acceptable psychometric properties (e.g. construct validity, reliability and ability to detect change) in this sample. However, these analyses should be repeated in a larger sample using data from RESILIENT part 2. Clinical trial information: NCT03088813. [Table: see text]

Developing a measure to assess clinicians’ ability to reflect on key staff–patient dynamics in forensic settings

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Polnay ◽  
Helen Walker ◽  
Christopher Gallacher
Keyword(s):  
Reflective Practice ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Good Test ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Purpose Relational dynamics between patients and staff in forensic settings can be complicated and demanding for both sides. Reflective practice groups (RPGs) bring clinicians together to reflect on these dynamics. To date, evaluation of RPGs has lacked quantitative focus and a suitable quantitative tool. Therefore, a self-report tool was designed. This paper aims to pilot The Relational Aspects of CarE (TRACE) scale with clinicians in a high-secure hospital and investigate its psychometric properties. Design/methodology/approach A multi-professional sample of 80 clinicians were recruited, completing TRACE and attitudes to personality disorder questionnaire (APDQ). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) determined factor structure and internal consistency of TRACE. A subset was selected to measure test–retest reliability. TRACE was cross-validated against the APDQ. Findings EFA found five factors underlying the 20 TRACE items: “awareness of common responses,” “discussing and normalising feelings;” “utilising feelings,” “wish to care” and “awareness of complicated affects.” This factor structure is complex, but items clustered logically to key areas originally used to generate items. Internal consistency (α = 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.55–0.76) demonstrated borderline acceptability. TRACE demonstrated good test–retest reliability (intra-class correlation = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.78–0.98) and face validity. TRACE indicated a slight negative correlation with APDQ. A larger data set is needed to substantiate these preliminary findings. Practical implications Early indications suggested TRACE was valid and reliable, suitable to measure the effectiveness of reflective practice. Originality/value The TRACE was a distinctive measure that filled a methodological gap in the literature.

scholarly journals Psychometric properties of a self-report version of the Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory for Women (SIDI-F-SR)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Velten ◽  
Gerrit Hirschfeld ◽  
Milena Meyers ◽  
Jürgen Margraf
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Sexual Interest ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Clinical Psychologist ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Absolute Agreement ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Restriction Of Range

Background: The Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory Female (SIDI-F) is a clinician-administered scale that allows for a comprehensive assessment of symptoms related to Hypoactive Sexual Desire Dysfunction (HSDD). As self-report questionnaires may facilitate less socially desirable responding and as time and resources are scarce in many clinical and research settings, a self-report version was developed (SIDI-F-SR). Aim: To investigate the agreement between the SIDI-F and a self-report version (SIDI-F-SR) and assess psychometric properties of the SIDI-F-SR. Methods: A total of 170 women (Mage=36.61, SD=10.61, range=20-69) with HSDD provided data on the SIDI-F, administered by a clinical psychologist via telephone, and the SIDI-F-SR, delivered as an Internet-based questionnaire. A subset of 19 women answered the SIDI-F-SR twice over a period of 14 weeks. Outcomes: Intraclass correlation as well as predictors of absolute agreement between SIDI-F and SIDI-F-SR, as well as internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and criterion-related validity of the SIDI-F-SR were examined. Results: There was high agreement between SIDI-F and SIDI-F-SR (ICC=.86). On average, women scored about one point higher in the self-report vs. the clinician-administered scale. Agreement was higher in young women and those with severe symptoms. Internal consistency of the SIDI-F-SR was acceptable (α=.76) and comparable to the SIDI-F (α=.74). When corrections for the restriction of range were applied, internal consistency of the SIDI-F-SR increased to .91. Test-retest-reliability was good (r=.74). Criterion-related validity was low but comparable between SIDI-F and SIDI-F-SR.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document