The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS): A new tool to measure the quality of health mobile applications

Smartphone technology provides free or inexpensive access to mental health and wellbeing resources. As a result the use of mobile applications for these purposes has increased significantly in recent years. Yet, there is currently no app quality assessment alternative to the popular ‘star’-ratings, which are often unreliable. This presentation describes the development of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) a new measure for classifying and rating the quality of mobile applications. A review of existing literature on app and web quality identified 25 published papers, conference proceedings, and online resources (published since 1999), which identified 372 explicit quality criteria. Qualitative analysis identified five broad categories of app quality rating criteria: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information quality, and overall satisfaction, which were refined into the 23-item MARS. Independent ratings of 50 randomly selected mental health and wellbeing mobile apps indicated the MARS had excellent levels of internal consistency (α = 0.92) and inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.85). The MARS provides practitioners and researchers with an easy-to-use, simple, objective and reliable tool for assessing mobile app quality. It also provides mHealth professionals with a checklist for the design and development of high quality apps.

Mobile app rating scale: A new tool for assessing the quality of health mobile apps

Background The use of mobile apps for health and well being promotion has grown exponentially in recent years. Yet, there is currently no app-quality assessment tool beyond “star”-ratings. Objective The objective of this study was to develop a reliable, multidimensional measure for trialling, classifying, and rating the quality of mobile health apps. Methods A literature search was conducted to identify articles containing explicit Web or app quality rating criteria published between January 2000 and January 2013. Existing criteria for the assessment of app quality were categorized by an expert panel to develop the new Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) subscales, items, descriptors, and anchors. There were sixty well being apps that were randomly selected using an iTunes search for MARS rating. There were ten that were used to pilot the rating procedure, and the remaining 50 provided data on interrater reliability. Results There were 372 explicit criteria for assessing Web or app quality that were extracted from 25 published papers, conference proceedings, and Internet resources. There were five broad categories of criteria that were identified including four objective quality scales: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information quality; and one subjective quality scale; which were refined into the 23-item MARS. The MARS demonstrated excellent internal consistency (alpha = .90) and interrater reliability intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC = .79). Conclusions The MARS is a simple, objective, and reliable tool for classifying and assessing the quality of mobile health apps. It can also be used to provide a checklist for the design and development of new high quality health apps.

Sportsmanship rating scale in tennis competition with young players

World Conference on Psychology and Sociology 2012

Psychometric evaluation and experimental validation of the statistics anxiety rating scale.

The Statistics Anxiety Rating Scale (STARS) was adapted into German to examine its psychometric properties (n = 400). Two validation studies (n = 66, n = 96) were conducted to examine its criterion-related validity. The psychometric properties of the questionnaire were very similar to those previously reported for the original English version in various countries and other language versions. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated 2 second-order factors: One was more closely related to anxiety and the other was more closely related to negative attitudes toward statistics. Predictive validity of the STARS was shown both in an experimental exam-like situation in the laboratory and during a real examination situation. Taken together, the findings indicate that statistics anxiety as assessed by the STARS is a useful construct that is more than just an expression of a more general disposition to anxiety.

The structure of the Statistics Anxiety Rating Scale: A confirmatory factor analysis using UK psychology students

This study aimed to examine the structure of the statistics anxiety rating scale. Responses from 650 undergraduate psychology students throughout the UK were collected through an on-line study. Based on previous research three different models were specified and estimated using confirmatory factor analysis. Fit indices were used to determine if the model fitted the data and a likelihood ratio difference test was used to determine the best fitting model. The original six factor model was the best explanation of the data. All six subscales were intercorrelated and internally consistent. It was concluded that the statistics anxiety rating scale was found to measure the six subscales it was designed to assess in a UK population.

Dimensionality, Reliability and Validity of the InterRAI Depression Rating Scale in a Canadian Palliative Care Population

A reliable and valid instrument is needed to screen for depression in palliative patients. The interRAI Depression Rating Scale (DRS) is based on seven items in the interRAI Palliative Care instrument. This study is the first to explore the dimensionality, reliability and validity of the DRS in a palliative population. Palliative home care patients (n = 5,175) residing in Ontario (Canada) were assessed with the interRAI Palliative Care instrument. Exploratory factor analysis and Mokken scale analysis were used to identify candidate conceptual models and evaluate scale homogeneity/performance. Confirmatory factor analysis compared models using standard goodness-of-fit indices. Convergent and divergent validity were investigated by examining polychoric correlations between the DRS and other items. The “known groups” test determined if the DRS meaningfully distinguished among client subgroups. The non-hierarchical two factor model showed acceptable fit with the data, and ordinal alpha coefficients of 0.83 and 0.82 were observed for the two DRS subscales. Omega hierarchical (ωh) was 0.78 for the bifactor model, with the general factor explaining three quarters of the common variance. Despite the multidimensionality evident in the factor analyses, bifactor modelling and the Mokken homogeneity coefficient (0.34) suggest that the DRS is a coherent scale that captures important information on sub-constructs of depression (e.g., somatic symptoms). Higher correlations were seen between the DRS and mood and psychosocial well-being items, and lower correlations with functional status and demographic variables. The DRS distinguished in the expected manner for known risk factors (e.g., social support, pain). The results suggest that the DRS is primarily unidimensional and reliable for use in screening for depression in palliative care patients.

Psychometric Properties of the Inventário Dimensional Clínico da Personalidade (IDCP) using the Rating Scale Model

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the Dimensional Clinical Personality Inventory (DCPI) using Rasch-based person and item analysis. 1281 participants were recruited, between 18 and 90 years of age (M=26.64; SD=8.94), 431 men (33.6%) and 127 (9.9%) patients diagnosed with axis I disorders and/or axis II according to DSM-IV-TR. Results indicated the IDCP scales performed reasonably well, and the usefulness of the analyses presented, demonstrate the Rasch model’s applicability for clinical applications. Among the important tools offered by the Rasch model, we explore the use of the person-item map, which visually presents the intuitively understandable psychological construct along the dimensional scale of the instrument.

Analyzing data from a fuzzy rating scale-based questionnaire : a case study

Resumen tomado de la publicaci??n

An item response analysis of the motor and behavioral subscales of the unified Huntington's disease rating scale in huntington disease gene expansion carriers

Although the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) is widely used in the assessment of Huntington disease (HD), the ability of individual items to discriminate individual differences in motor or behavioral manifestations has not been extensively studied in HD gene expansion carriers without a motor-defined clinical diagnosis (ie, prodromal-HD or prHD). To elucidate the relationship between scores on individual motor and behavioral UHDRS items and total score for each subscale, a nonparametric item response analysis was performed on retrospective data from 2 multicenter longitudinal studies. Motor and behavioral assessments were supplied for 737 prHD individuals with data from 2114 visits (PREDICT-HD) and 686 HD individuals with data from 1482 visits (REGISTRY). Option characteristic curves were generated for UHDRS subscale items in relation to their subscale score. In prHD, overall severity of motor signs was low, and participants had scores of 2 or above on very few items. In HD, motor items that assessed ocular pursuit, saccade initiation, finger tapping, tandem walking, and to a lesser extent, saccade velocity, dysarthria, tongue protrusion, pronation/supination, Luria, bradykinesia, choreas, gait, and balance on the retropulsion test were found to discriminate individual differences across a broad range of motor severity. In prHD, depressed mood, anxiety, and irritable behavior demonstrated good discriminative properties. In HD, depressed mood demonstrated a good relationship with the overall behavioral score. These data suggest that at least some UHDRS items appear to have utility across a broad range of severity, although many items demonstrate problematic features.

The bipolar depression rating scale (BDRS) : its development, validation and utility

Objectives: Unipolar and bipolar depression differ neurobiologically and in clinical presentation. Existing depression rating instruments, used in bipolar depression, fail to capture the necessary phenomenological nuances, as they are based on and skewed towards the characteristics of unipolar depression. Both clinically and in research there is a growing need for a new observer-rated scale that is specifically designed to assess bipolar depression.

Methods: An instrument reflecting the characteristics of bipolar depression was drafted by the authors, and administered to 122 participants aged 18–65 (44 males and 78 females) with a diagnosis of DSM-IV bipolar disorder, who were currently experiencing symptoms of depression. The Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS) was administered together with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS).

Results: The BDRS has strong internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.917), and robust correlation coefficients with the MADRS (r = 0.906) and HAM-D (r = 0.744), and the mixed subscale correlated with the YMRS (r = 0.757). Exploratory factor analysis showed a three-factor solution gave the best account of the data. These factors corresponded to depression (somatic), depression (psychological) and mixed symptom clusters.

Conclusions: This study provides evidence for the validity of the BDRS for the measurement of depression in bipolar disorder. These results suggest good internal validity, provisional evidence of inter-rater reliability and strong correlations with other depression rating scales.