IntroductionSaudi 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... Show moreIntroductionSaudi 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. MethodsThe 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. ResultsThe 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. DiscussionThe 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
Penson, A.; Walraven, I.; Bronkhorst, E.; Grootenhuis, M.A.; Tissing, W.J.E.; Pal, H.J.H. van der; ... ; Loonen, J. 2021
Background Fatigue is often reported by patients with childhood cancer both during and after cancer treatment. Several instruments to measure fatigue exist, although none are specifically validated... Show moreBackground Fatigue is often reported by patients with childhood cancer both during and after cancer treatment. Several instruments to measure fatigue exist, although none are specifically validated for use in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). The aim of the current study was to present norm values and psychometric properties of the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS) and Short Fatigue Questionnaire (SFQ) in a nationwide cohort of CCS. Methods In total, 2073 participants were included from the Dutch Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (DCCSS) LATER cohort. Normative data, construct validity, structural validity, and internal consistency were calculated for the CIS and SFQ. In addition, reliability and a cutoff score to indicate severe fatigue were determined for the SFQ. Results Correlations between CIS/SFQ and vitality measures asking about fatigue were high (>0.8). Correlations between CIS/SFQ and measures of different constructs (sleep, depressive emotions, and role functioning emotional) were moderate (0.4-0.6). Confirmatory factor analysis resulted in a four-factor solution for the CIS and a one-factor solution for the SFQ with Cronbach's alpha for each (sub)scale showing good to excellent values (>0.8). Test-retest reliability of the SFQ was adequate (Pearson's correlation = 0.88; ICC = 0.946; weighted Cohen's kappa item scores ranged 0.31-0.50) and a cut-off score of 18 showed good sensitivity and specificity scores (92.6% and 91.3%, respectively). Conclusion The current study shows that the SFQ is a good instrument to screen for severe fatigue in CCS. The CIS can be used as a tool to assess the multiple fatigue dimensions in CCS. Show less
Flens, G.; Terwee, C.B.; Smits, N.; Williams, G.; Spinhoven, P.; Roorda, L.D.; Beurs, E. de 2021
Public Significance Statement This study suggests that PROMIS CATs for Depression and Anxiety measure the same constructs as matching BSI subscales in Dutch adult patients treated for common mental... Show morePublic Significance Statement This study suggests that PROMIS CATs for Depression and Anxiety measure the same constructs as matching BSI subscales in Dutch adult patients treated for common mental disorders, are at least as able to detect change over time, and categorize the change scores of more patients as actually changed. Based on these findings, the PROMIS CATs may be considered a modest improvement as tools for reviewing treatment progress with patients.We evaluated construct validity, responsiveness, and utility of change indicators of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS adult v1.0 item banks for Depression and Anxiety administered as computerized adaptive test (CAT). Specifically, the CATs were compared to the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) using pre- and re-test data of adult patients treated for common mental disorders (N = 400; median pre-to-re-test interval = 215 days). Construct validity was evaluated with Pearson's correlations and Cohen's ds; responsiveness with Pearson's correlations and pre-post effect sizes (ES); utility of change indicators with kappa coefficients and percentages of (dis)agreement. The results showed that the PROMIS CATs measure similar constructs as matching BSI scales. Under the assumption of measuring similar constructs, the CAT and BSI Depression scales were similarly responsive. For the Anxiety scales, we found a higher responsiveness for CAT (ES = 0.64) compared to the BSI (ES = 0.50). Finally, both CATs categorized the change scores of more patients as changed compared to matching BSI scales, indicating that the PROMIS CATs may be more able to detect actual change than the BSI. Based on these findings, the PROMIS CATs may be considered a modest improvement over matching BSI scales as tools for reviewing treatment progress with patients. We discuss several additional differences between the PROMIS CATs and the BSI to help test users choose instruments. These differences include the adopted measurement theory (Item Response Theory vs. Classical Test Theory), the mode of administration (CAT vs. fixed items), and the area of application (universal vs. predominantly clinical). Show less
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) may lead to impairments in various outcome domains. Since most instruments assessing these are only available in a limited number of languages, psychometrically... Show moreTraumatic brain injury (TBI) may lead to impairments in various outcome domains. Since most instruments assessing these are only available in a limited number of languages, psychometrically validated translations are important for research and clinical practice. Thus, our aim was to investigate the psychometric properties of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) applied in the CENTER-TBI study. The study sample comprised individuals who filled in the six-months assessments (GAD-7, PHQ-9, PCL-5, RPQ, QOLIBRI/-OS, SF-36v2/-12v2). Classical psychometric characteristics were investigated and compared with those of the original English versions. The reliability was satisfactory to excellent; the instruments were comparable to each other and to the original versions. Validity analyses demonstrated medium to high correlations with well-established measures. The original factor structure was replicated by all the translations, except for the RPQ, SF-36v2/-12v2 and some language samples for the PCL-5, most probably due to the factor structure of the original instruments. The translation of one to two items of the PHQ-9, RPQ, PCL-5, and QOLIBRI in three languages could be improved in the future to enhance scoring and application at the individual level. Researchers and clinicians now have access to reliable and valid instruments to improve outcome assessment after TBI in national and international health care. Show less
Introduction: Standardized assessments are widely used by speech pathologists in clinical and research settings to evaluate the language abilities of school-aged children and inform decisions about... Show moreIntroduction: Standardized assessments are widely used by speech pathologists in clinical and research settings to evaluate the language abilities of school-aged children and inform decisions about diagnosis, eligibility for services and intervention. Given the significance of these decisions, it is important that assessments have sound psychometric properties.Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to examine the psychometric quality of currently available comprehensive language assessments for school-aged children and identify assessments with the best evidence for use.Methods: Using the PRISMA framework as a guideline, a search of five databases and a review of websites and textbooks was undertaken to identify language assessments and published material on the reliability and validity of these assessments. The methodological quality of selected studies was evaluated using the COSMIN taxonomy and checklist.Results: Fifteen assessments were evaluated. For most assessments evidence of hypothesis testing (convergent and discriminant validity) was identified; with a smaller number of assessments having some evidence of reliability and content validity. No assessments presented with evidence of structural validity, internal consistency or error measurement. Overall, all assessments were identified as having limitations with regards to evidence of psychometric quality.Conclusions: Further research is required to provide good evidence of psychometric quality for currently available language assessments. Of the assessments evaluated, the Assessment of Literacy and Language, the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5th Edition, the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Preschool: 2nd Edition and the Preschool Language Scales-5th Edition presented with most evidence and are thus recommended for use. Show less
Colins, O.F.; Fanti, K.; Larsson, H.; Andershed, H. 2017
