INTRODUCTION\nMETHODS\nRESULTS\nDISCUSSION\nSaudi Arabia experiences elevated levels of body-shape dissatisfaction which might be related to the increased thin ideal. Studies on body-shape... Show moreINTRODUCTION\nMETHODS\nRESULTS\nDISCUSSION\nSaudi Arabia experiences elevated levels of body-shape dissatisfaction which might be related to the increased thin ideal. Studies on body-shape dissatisfaction are scarce, mainly because adapted assessment tools are unavailable. This study describes the Saudi-Arabic adaptation of the Body Shape Questionnaire (BSQ34), preliminary examines the psychometric properties and provides normative data.\nThe BSQ34 was administered in a convenience community sample (N = 867) between April 2017 and May 2018. Receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis was used to establish discriminant validity, in a subsample (N = 602) in which the Eating Disorder Examination-Shape concern, was administered, the factor structure investigated with confirmatory-factor analyses and T-scores and percentile scores were determined.\nThe BSQ34 discriminated well between low and high levels of body-shape dissatisfaction (area-under-the-curve value = 0.93), had high internal consistency and a unidimensional factor structure, and 23.9% appeared at risk for body-shape dissatisfaction. Analyses were repeated for the shortened BSQ8C, which yielded similar results.\nThe results indicated that the BSQ34 and BSQ8C appeared suitable measurement tools to screen for body-shape dissatisfaction in a Saudi convenience community sample, mainly comprised young, unmarried, and highly educated women. The BSQ34 supplies more information on the type of concerns respondents have, which is worthwhile when the measure is used in a clinical setting; the BSQ8C is recommended as a short screener. As body-shape dissatisfaction is viewed as a risk factor for the development of eating disorder symptoms, screening for body-shape dissatisfaction with reliable tools is important to detect individuals at risk for eating disorder symptoms and may suggest subsequent preventive steps. Show less
INTRODUCTION\nMETHODS\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSIONS\nThe outcomes anxiety and depression are measured frequently by healthcare providers to assess the impact of a disease, but with numerous instruments.... Show moreINTRODUCTION\nMETHODS\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSIONS\nThe outcomes anxiety and depression are measured frequently by healthcare providers to assess the impact of a disease, but with numerous instruments. PROMIS item banks provide an opportunity for standardized measurement. Cross-cultural validity of measures and the availability of reference values are prerequisites for standardized measurement.\nPROMIS Anxiety and Depression item banks were completed by 1002 representative Dutch persons. To evaluate cross-cultural validity, data from US participants in PROMIS wave 1 were used and differential item functioning (DIF) was investigated, using an iterative hybrid of logistic regression and item response theory. McFadden's pseudo R2-change of 2% was the critical threshold. The impact of any DIF on full item banks and short forms was investigated. To obtain Dutch reference values, T-scores for anxiety and depression were calculated for the complete Dutch sample, and age-group and gender subpopulations. Thresholds corresponding to normal limits, mild, moderate and severe symptoms were computed.\nIn both item banks, two items had DIF but with minimal impact on population level T-scores for full item banks and short forms. The Dutch general population had a T-score of 49.9 for anxiety and 49.6 for depression, similar to the T-scores of 50.0 of the US general population. T-scores for age-group and gender subpopulations were also similar to T-scores of the US general population. Thresholds for mild, moderate and severe anxiety and depression were set to 55, 60 and 70, identical to US thresholds.\nThe limited number of items with DIF and its minimal impact, enables the use of standard (US) item parameters and comparisons of scores between Dutch and US populations. The Dutch reference values provide an important tool for healthcare professionals and researchers to evaluate and interpret symptoms of anxiety and depression, stimulating the uptake of PROMIS measures, and contributing to standardized outcome measurement. Show less
Sweetman, J.; Feltz-Cornelis, C.M. van der; Elfeddali, I.; Beurs E. de 2022
OBJECTIVE\nMETHODS\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSION\nWork stress is a global issue with countries such as the UK requiring organisations to protect employees. Work stress can be beneficial (challenging) or... Show moreOBJECTIVE\nMETHODS\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSION\nWork stress is a global issue with countries such as the UK requiring organisations to protect employees. Work stress can be beneficial (challenging) or harmful (overwhelming), and characteristics such as resilience are thought to mitigate some of the negative effects. This paper describes the validation of two new scales. The WOSS-13 was designed to measure both benign and harmful experiences of work stress, while the ReWoS-24 captures information about individual and team resilience.\nFor both scales the assessment of individual items, domains captured by scale items, reliability and validity were completed using data from a survey of 1980 individuals from the University of York, England. A sub-sample of respondents (N = 609) provided additional data for retest purposes. Analyses were performed using these two samples.\nResponses to scale items were found to be normally distributed. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated the WOSS-13 was comprised of three subscales: positive work-related affect/stress, general positive affect and harmful stress. The ReWoS-24 is presented as four sub-scales: general well-being, well-being at work, satisfaction with job performance and team resilience. All subscales demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.80). Both scales complement existing measures of stress and mental health.\nThe findings suggest that the WOSS-13 is a valid and reliable measure which enables the assessment of both benign and harmful forms of work stress. The ReWoS-24 is a valid and reliable measure of individual and team resilience. These scales could be used in workplaces to assess for and mitigate against, harmful work stress. Show less
Beurs E. de; Blankers, M.; Peen, J.; Rademacher, C.; Podgorski, A.; Dekker, J. 2022
OBJECTIVE\nMETHOD\nRESULTS\nDISCUSSION\nThe uptake of digital interventions in mental health care (MHC) has been slow, as many therapists and patients believe that in-person contact is essential... Show moreOBJECTIVE\nMETHOD\nRESULTS\nDISCUSSION\nThe uptake of digital interventions in mental health care (MHC) has been slow, as many therapists and patients believe that in-person contact is essential for establishing a good working relationship and good outcomes in treatment. The public health policies regarding social distancing during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced an abrupt transformation of MHC provisions for outpatients: Since mid-March 2020, nearly all in-person contact was replaced with videoconferencing. The COVID-19 crisis offered a unique opportunity to investigate whether MHC with videoconferencing yields inferior results as compared to in-person interventions.\nIn a large urban MHC facility in the Netherlands, measurement-based care is routine practice. Outcome data are regularly collected to support shared decision making and monitor patient progress. For this study, pretest and post-test data were used to compare outcomes for three cohorts: treatments performed prior to, partially during and entirely during the COVID-19 lockdown. Outcomes were compared in two large data sets: Basic MHC (N = 1392) and Specialized MHC (N = 1040).\nTherapeutic outcomes appeared robust for COVID-19 conditions across the three cohorts: No differences in outcomes were found between treatments that were conducted during lockdown compared to in-person treatments prior to COVID-19, or treatments which started in-person, but needed to be continued by means of videoconferencing.\nVideoconferencing care during the COVID-19 pandemic had similar outcomes compared to traditional in-person care. These real-world results corroborate findings of previous randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses in which videoconferencing and in-person care has been directly compared in terms of clinical effectiveness. Show less
