Assessing the construct validity and reliability of the parental perception on antibiotics (PAPA) scales

Background: The overuse of antibiotics is becoming an increasing concern. Antibiotic resistance, which increases both the burden of disease, and the cost of health services, is perhaps the most profound impact of antibiotics overuse. Attempts have been made to develop instruments to measure the psychosocial constructs underlying antibiotics use, however, none of these instruments have undergone thorough psychometric validation. This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the Parental Perceptions on Antibiotics (PAPA) scales. The PAPA scales attempt to measure the factors influencing parental use of antibiotics in children. Methods: 1111 parents of children younger than 12 years old were recruited from primary schools’ parental meetings in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia from September 2012 to January 2013. The structure of the PAPA instrument was validated using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with measurement model fit evaluated using the raw and scaled χ2, Goodness of Fit Index, and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation. Results: A five-factor model was confirmed with the model showing good fit. Constructs in the model include: Knowledge and Beliefs, Behaviors, Sources of information, Adherence, and Awareness about antibiotics resistance. The instrument was shown to have good internal consistency, and good discriminant and convergent validity. Conclusion: The availability of an instrument able to measure the psychosocial factors underlying antibiotics usage allows the risk factors underlying antibiotic use and overuse to now be investigated.

Extending the IS-Impact Model into the higher education sector

The study addresses known limitations of what may be the most important dependent variable in Information Systems (IS) research; IS-Success or IS-Impact. The study is expected to force a deeper understanding of the broad notions of IS success and impact. The aims of the research are to: (1) enhance the robustness and minimize limitations of the IS-Impact model, and (2) introduce and operationalise a more rigorously validated IS Impact measurement model to Universities, as a reliable model for evaluating different Administrative Systems. In extending and further generalizing the IS-Impact model, the study will address contemporary validation issues.

Validating the IS-Impact model in Australasian universities

This paper presents a novel study that aims to contribute to understanding the phenomenon of Enterprise Systems (ES) evaluation in Australasian universities. The proposed study addresses known limitations of arguably the most significant dependent variable in the Information System (IS) field - IS Success or IS-Impact. This study adopts the IS-Impact measurement model, reported by Gable et al. (2008), as the primary commencing theory-base and applies research extension strategy described by Berthon et al. (2002); extending both theory and the context. This study employs a longitudinal, multi-method research design, with two interrelated phases – exploratory and confirmatory. The exploratory phase aims to investigate the applicability and sufficiency of the IS-Impact dimensions and measures in the new context. The confirmatory phase will gather quantitative data to statistically validate IS-Impact model as a formative index.

Formative and reflective measurement and validation mismatch in survey research : an archival analysis of information systems success constructs 1985-2007

The generic IS-success constructs first identified by DeLone and McLean (1992) continue to be widely employed in research. Yet, recent work by Petter et al (2007) has cast doubt on the validity of many mainstream constructs employed in IS research over the past 3 decades; critiquing the almost universal conceptualization and validation of these constructs as reflective when in many studies the measures appear to have been implicitly operationalized as formative. Cited examples of proper specification of the Delone and McLean constructs are few, particularly in light of their extensive employment in IS research. This paper introduces a four-stage formative construct development framework: Conceive > Operationalize > Respond > Validate (CORV). Employing the CORV framework in an archival analysis of research published in top outlets 1985-2007, the paper explores the extent of possible problems with past IS research due to potential misspecification of the four application-related success dimensions: Individual-Impact, Organizational-Impact, System-Quality and Information-Quality. Results suggest major concerns where there is a mismatch of the Respond and Validate stages. A general dearth of attention to the Operationalize and Respond stages in methodological writings is also observed.

IS service quality as a multi-dimensional formative constuct

This study is motivated by, and proceeds from, a central interest in the importance of evaluating IS service quality and adopts the IS ZOT SERVQUAL instrument (Kettinger & Lee, 2005) as its core theory base. This study conceptualises IS service quality as a multidimensional formative construct and seeks to answer the main research questions: “Is the IS service quality construct valid as a 1st-order formative, 2nd-order formative multidimensional construct?” Additionally, with the aim of validating the IS service quality construct within its nomological net, as in prior service marketing work, Satisfaction was hypothesised as its immediate consequence. With the goal of testing the above research question, IS service quality and Satisfaction were operationalised in a quantitative survey instrument. Partial least squares (PLS), employing 219 valid responses, largely evidenced the validity of IS service quality as a multidimensional formative construct. The nomological validity of the IS service quality construct was also evidenced by demonstrating that 55% of Satisfaction was explained by the multidimensional formative IS service quality construct.

A critical evaluation and comparison of two formative measures of system quality using criterion variables

Evaluating the validity of formative variables has presented ongoing challenges for researchers. In this paper we use global criterion measures to compare and critically evaluate two alternative formative measures of System Quality. One model is based on the ISO-9126 software quality standard, and the other is based on a leading information systems research model. We find that despite both models having a strong provenance, many of the items appear to be non-significant in our study. We examine the implications of this by evaluating the quality of the criterion variables we used, and the performance of PLS when evaluating formative models with a large number of items. We find that our respondents had difficulty distinguishing between global criterion variables measuring different aspects of overall System Quality. Also, because formative indicators “compete with one another” in PLS, it may be difficult to develop a set of measures which are all significant for a complex formative construct with a broad scope and a large number of items. Overall, we suggest that there is cautious evidence that both sets of measures are valid and largely equivalent, although questions still remain about the measures, the use of criterion variables, and the use of PLS for this type of model evaluation.

Parents’ self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and self-reported task performance when managing atopic dermatitis in children: Instrument reliability and validity

BACKGROUND: Support and education for parents faced with managing a child with atopic dermatitis is crucial to the success of current treatments. Interventions aiming to improve parent management of this condition are promising. Unfortunately, evaluation is hampered by lack of precise research tools to measure change. OBJECTIVES: To develop a suite of valid and reliable research instruments to appraise parents' self-efficacy for performing atopic dermatitis management tasks; outcome expectations of performing management tasks; and self-reported task performance in a community sample of parents of children with atopic dermatitis. METHODS: The Parents' Eczema Management Scale (PEMS) and the Parents' Outcome Expectations of Eczema Management Scale (POEEMS) were developed from an existing self-efficacy scale, the Parental Self-Efficacy with Eczema Care Index (PASECI). Each scale was presented in a single self-administered questionnaire, to measure self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and self-reported task performance related to managing child atopic dermatitis. Each was tested with a community sample of parents of children with atopic dermatitis, and psychometric evaluation of the scales' reliability and validity was conducted. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A community-based convenience sample of 120 parents of children with atopic dermatitis completed the self-administered questionnaire. Participants were recruited through schools across Australia. RESULTS: Satisfactory internal consistency and test-retest reliability was demonstrated for all three scales. Construct validity was satisfactory, with positive relationships between self-efficacy for managing atopic dermatitis and general perceived self-efficacy; self-efficacy for managing atopic dermatitis and self-reported task performance; and self-efficacy for managing atopic dermatitis and outcome expectations. Factor analyses revealed two-factor structures for PEMS and PASECI alike, with both scales containing factors related to performing routine management tasks, and managing the child's symptoms and behaviour. Factor analysis was also applied to POEEMS resulting in a three-factor structure. Factors relating to independent management of atopic dermatitis by the parent, involving healthcare professionals in management, and involving the child in the management of atopic dermatitis were found. Parents' self-efficacy and outcome expectations had a significant influence on self-reported task performance. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that PEMS and POEEMS are valid and reliable instruments worthy of further psychometric evaluation. Likewise, validity and reliability of PASECI was confirmed.

Knowledge management competence for Enterprise System success

This study conceptualizes, operationalises and validates the concept of Knowledge Management Competence as a four-phase multidimensional formative index. Employing survey data from 310 respondents representing 27 organizations using the SAP Enterprise System Financial module, the study results demonstrate a large, significant, positive relationship between Knowledge Management Competence and Enterprise Systems Success (ES-success, as conceived by Gable Sedera and Chan (2008)); suggesting important implications for practice. Strong evidence of the validity of Knowledge Management Competence as conceived and operationalised, too suggests potential from future research evaluating its relationships with possible antecedents and consequences.

Validating the is-impact model in the Malaysian public sector

This research is one of several ongoing studies conducted within the IT Professional Services (ITPS) research programme at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). In 2003, ITPS introduced the IS-Impact model, a measurement model for measuring information systems success from the viewpoint of multiple stakeholders. The model, along with its instrument, is robust, simple, yet generalisable, and yields results that are comparable across time, stakeholders, different systems and system contexts. The IS-Impact model is defined as “a measure at a point in time, of the stream of net benefits from the Information System (IS), to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key-user-groups”. The model represents four dimensions, which are ‘Individual Impact’, ‘Organizational Impact’, ‘Information Quality’ and ‘System Quality’. The two Impact dimensions measure the up-to-date impact of the evaluated system, while the remaining two Quality dimensions act as proxies for probable future impacts (Gable, Sedera & Chan, 2008). To fulfil the goal of ITPS, “to develop the most widely employed model” this research re-validates and extends the IS-Impact model in a new context. This method/context-extension research aims to test the generalisability of the model by addressing known limitations of the model. One of the limitations of the model relates to the extent of external validity of the model. In order to gain wide acceptance, a model should be consistent and work well in different contexts. The IS-Impact model, however, was only validated in the Australian context, and packaged software was chosen as the IS understudy. Thus, this study is concerned with whether the model can be applied in another different context. Aiming for a robust and standardised measurement model that can be used across different contexts, this research re-validates and extends the IS-Impact model and its instrument to public sector organisations in Malaysia. The overarching research question (managerial question) of this research is “How can public sector organisations in Malaysia measure the impact of information systems systematically and effectively?” With two main objectives, the managerial question is broken down into two specific research questions. The first research question addresses the applicability (relevance) of the dimensions and measures of the IS-Impact model in the Malaysian context. Moreover, this research question addresses the completeness of the model in the new context. Initially, this research assumes that the dimensions and measures of the IS-Impact model are sufficient for the new context. However, some IS researchers suggest that the selection of measures needs to be done purposely for different contextual settings (DeLone & McLean, 1992, Rai, Lang & Welker, 2002). Thus, the first research question is as follows, “Is the IS-Impact model complete for measuring the impact of IS in Malaysian public sector organisations?” [RQ1]. The IS-Impact model is a multidimensional model that consists of four dimensions or constructs. Each dimension is represented by formative measures or indicators. Formative measures are known as composite variables because these measures make up or form the construct, or, in this case, the dimension in the IS-Impact model. These formative measures define different aspects of the dimension, thus, a measurement model of this kind needs to be tested not just on the structural relationship between the constructs but also the validity of each measure. In a previous study, the IS-Impact model was validated using formative validation techniques, as proposed in the literature (i.e., Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 2001, Diamantopoulos and Siguaw, 2006, Petter, Straub and Rai, 2007). However, there is potential for improving the validation testing of the model by adding more criterion or dependent variables. This includes identifying a consequence of the IS-Impact construct for the purpose of validation. Moreover, a different approach is employed in this research, whereby the validity of the model is tested using the Partial Least Squares (PLS) method, a component-based structural equation modelling (SEM) technique. Thus, the second research question addresses the construct validation of the IS-Impact model; “Is the IS-Impact model valid as a multidimensional formative construct?” [RQ2]. This study employs two rounds of surveys, each having a different and specific aim. The first is qualitative and exploratory, aiming to investigate the applicability and sufficiency of the IS-Impact dimensions and measures in the new context. This survey was conducted in a state government in Malaysia. A total of 77 valid responses were received, yielding 278 impact statements. The results from the qualitative analysis demonstrate the applicability of most of the IS-Impact measures. The analysis also shows a significant new measure having emerged from the context. This new measure was added as one of the System Quality measures. The second survey is a quantitative survey that aims to operationalise the measures identified from the qualitative analysis and rigorously validate the model. This survey was conducted in four state governments (including the state government that was involved in the first survey). A total of 254 valid responses were used in the data analysis. Data was analysed using structural equation modelling techniques, following the guidelines for formative construct validation, to test the validity and reliability of the constructs in the model. This study is the first research that extends the complete IS-Impact model in a new context that is different in terms of nationality, language and the type of information system (IS). The main contribution of this research is to present a comprehensive, up-to-date IS-Impact model, which has been validated in the new context. The study has accomplished its purpose of testing the generalisability of the IS-Impact model and continuing the IS evaluation research by extending it in the Malaysian context. A further contribution is a validated Malaysian language IS-Impact measurement instrument. It is hoped that the validated Malaysian IS-Impact instrument will encourage related IS research in Malaysia, and that the demonstrated model validity and generalisability will encourage a cumulative tradition of research previously not possible. The study entailed several methodological improvements on prior work, including: (1) new criterion measures for the overall IS-Impact construct employed in ‘identification through measurement relations’; (2) a stronger, multi-item ‘Satisfaction’ construct, employed in ‘identification through structural relations’; (3) an alternative version of the main survey instrument in which items are randomized (rather than blocked) for comparison with the main survey data, in attention to possible common method variance (no significant differences between these two survey instruments were observed); (4) demonstrates a validation process of formative indexes of a multidimensional, second-order construct (existing examples mostly involved unidimensional constructs); (5) testing the presence of suppressor effects that influence the significance of some measures and dimensions in the model; and (6) demonstrates the effect of an imbalanced number of measures within a construct to the contribution power of each dimension in a multidimensional model.

Realizing benefits from enterprise architecture : a measurement model

Enterprise architecture (EA) management has become an intensively discussed approach to manage enterprise transformations. Despite the popularity and potential of EA, both researchers and practitioners lament a lack of knowledge about the realization of benefits from EA. To determine the benefits from EA, we explore the various dimensions of EA benefit realization and report on the development of a validated and robust measurement instrument. In this paper, we test the reliability and construct validity of the EA benefit realization model (EABRM), which we have designed based on the DeLone & McLean IS success model and findings from exploratory interviews. A confirmatory factor analysis confirms the existence of an impact of five distinct and individually important dimensions on the benefits derived from EA: EA artefact quality, EA infrastructure quality, EA service quality, EA culture, and EA use. The analysis presented in this paper shows that the EA benefit realization model is an instrument that demonstrates strong reliability and validity.

Evaluating the success of large-scale, integrated information systems through the lens of IS-impact and IS-support

This study proceeds from a central interest in the importance of systematically evaluating operational large-scale integrated information systems (IS) in organisations. The study is conducted within the IS-Impact Research Track at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). The goal of the IS-Impact Track is, "to develop the most widely employed model for benchmarking information systems in organizations for the joint benefit of both research and practice" (Gable et al, 2009). The track espouses programmatic research having the principles of incrementalism, tenacity, holism and generalisability through replication and extension research strategies. Track efforts have yielded the bicameral IS-Impact measurement model; the ‘impact’ half includes Organisational-Impact and Individual-Impact dimensions; the ‘quality’ half includes System-Quality and Information-Quality dimensions. Akin to Gregor’s (2006) analytic theory, the ISImpact model is conceptualised as a formative, multidimensional index and is defined as "a measure at a point in time, of the stream of net benefits from the IS, to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key-user-groups" (Gable et al., 2008, p: 381). The study adopts the IS-Impact model (Gable, et al., 2008) as its core theory base. Prior work within the IS-Impact track has been consciously constrained to Financial IS for their homogeneity. This study adopts a context-extension strategy (Berthon et al., 2002) with the aim "to further validate and extend the IS-Impact measurement model in a new context - i.e. a different IS - Human Resources (HR)". The overarching research question is: "How can the impacts of large-scale integrated HR applications be effectively and efficiently benchmarked?" This managerial question (Cooper & Emory, 1995) decomposes into two more specific research questions – In the new HR context: (RQ1): "Is the IS-Impact model complete?" (RQ2): "Is the ISImpact model valid as a 1st-order formative, 2nd-order formative multidimensional construct?" The study adhered to the two-phase approach of Gable et al. (2008) to hypothesise and validate a measurement model. The initial ‘exploratory phase’ employed a zero base qualitative approach to re-instantiating the IS-Impact model in the HR context. The subsequent ‘confirmatory phase’ sought to validate the resultant hypothesised measurement model against newly gathered quantitative data. The unit of analysis for the study is the application, ‘ALESCO’, an integrated large-scale HR application implemented at Queensland University of Technology (QUT), a large Australian university (with approximately 40,000 students and 5000 staff). Target respondents of both study phases were ALESCO key-user-groups: strategic users, management users, operational users and technical users, who directly use ALESCO or its outputs. An open-ended, qualitative survey was employed in the exploratory phase, with the objective of exploring the completeness and applicability of the IS-Impact model’s dimensions and measures in the new context, and to conceptualise any resultant model changes to be operationalised in the confirmatory phase. Responses from 134 ALESCO users to the main survey question, "What do you consider have been the impacts of the ALESCO (HR) system in your division/department since its implementation?" were decomposed into 425 ‘impact citations.’ Citation mapping using a deductive (top-down) content analysis approach instantiated all dimensions and measures of the IS-Impact model, evidencing its content validity in the new context. Seeking to probe additional (perhaps negative) impacts; the survey included the additional open question "In your opinion, what can be done better to improve the ALESCO (HR) system?" Responses to this question decomposed into a further 107 citations which in the main did not map to IS-Impact, but rather coalesced around the concept of IS-Support. Deductively drawing from relevant literature, and working inductively from the unmapped citations, the new ‘IS-Support’ construct, including the four formative dimensions (i) training, (ii) documentation, (iii) assistance, and (iv) authorisation (each having reflective measures), was defined as: "a measure at a point in time, of the support, the [HR] information system key-user groups receive to increase their capabilities in utilising the system." Thus, a further goal of the study became validation of the IS-Support construct, suggesting the research question (RQ3): "Is IS-Support valid as a 1st-order reflective, 2nd-order formative multidimensional construct?" With the aim of validating IS-Impact within its nomological net (identification through structural relations), as in prior work, Satisfaction was hypothesised as its immediate consequence. The IS-Support construct having derived from a question intended to probe IS-Impacts, too was hypothesised as antecedent to Satisfaction, thereby suggesting the research question (RQ4): "What is the relative contribution of IS-Impact and IS-Support to Satisfaction?" With the goal of testing the above research questions, IS-Impact, IS-Support and Satisfaction were operationalised in a quantitative survey instrument. Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modelling employing 221 valid responses largely evidenced the validity of the commencing IS-Impact model in the HR context. ISSupport too was validated as operationalised (including 11 reflective measures of its 4 formative dimensions). IS-Support alone explained 36% of Satisfaction; IS-Impact alone 70%; in combination both explaining 71% with virtually all influence of ISSupport subsumed by IS-Impact. Key study contributions to research include: (1) validation of IS-Impact in the HR context, (2) validation of a newly conceptualised IS-Support construct as important antecedent of Satisfaction, and (3) validation of the redundancy of IS-Support when gauging IS-Impact. The study also makes valuable contributions to practice, the research track and the sponsoring organisation.

Extending and validating the is-impact model in Saudi Arabia : accounting for computer network quality

Organizations from every industry sector seek to enhance their business performance and competitiveness through the deployment of contemporary information systems (IS), such as Enterprise Systems (ERP). Investments in ERP are complex and costly, attracting scrutiny and pressure to justify their cost. Thus, IS researchers highlight the need for systematic evaluation of information system success, or impact, which has resulted in the introduction of varied models for evaluating information systems. One of these systematic measurement approaches is the IS-Impact Model introduced by a team of researchers at Queensland University of technology (QUT) (Gable, Sedera, & Chan, 2008). The IS-Impact Model is conceptualized as a formative, multidimensional index that consists of four dimensions. Gable et al. (2008) define IS-Impact as "a measure at a point in time, of the stream of net benefits from the IS, to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key-user-groups" (p.381). The IT Evaluation Research Program (ITE-Program) at QUT has grown the IS-Impact Research Track with the central goal of conducting further studies to enhance and extend the IS-Impact Model. The overall goal of the IS-Impact research track at QUT is "to develop the most widely employed model for benchmarking information systems in organizations for the joint benefit of both research and practice" (Gable, 2009). In order to achieve that, the IS-Impact research track advocates programmatic research having the principles of tenacity, holism, and generalizability through extension research strategies. This study was conducted within the IS-Impact Research Track, to further generalize the IS-Impact Model by extending it to the Saudi Arabian context. According to Hofsted (2012), the national culture of Saudi Arabia is significantly different from the Australian national culture making the Saudi Arabian culture an interesting context for testing the external validity of the IS-Impact Model. The study re-visits the IS-Impact Model from the ground up. Rather than assume the existing instrument is valid in the new context, or simply assess its validity through quantitative data collection, the study takes a qualitative, inductive approach to re-assessing the necessity and completeness of existing dimensions and measures. This is done in two phases: Exploratory Phase and Confirmatory Phase. The exploratory phase addresses the first research question of the study "Is the IS-Impact Model complete and able to capture the impact of information systems in Saudi Arabian Organization?". The content analysis, used to analyze the Identification Survey data, indicated that 2 of the 37 measures of the IS-Impact Model are not applicable for the Saudi Arabian Context. Moreover, no new measures or dimensions were identified, evidencing the completeness and content validity of the IS-Impact Model. In addition, the Identification Survey data suggested several concepts related to IS-Impact, the most prominent of which was "Computer Network Quality" (CNQ). The literature supported the existence of a theoretical link between IS-Impact and CNQ (CNQ is viewed as an antecedent of IS-Impact). With the primary goal of validating the IS-Impact model within its extended nomological network, CNQ was introduced to the research model. The Confirmatory Phase addresses the second research question of the study "Is the Extended IS-Impact Model Valid as a Hierarchical Multidimensional Formative Measurement Model?". The objective of the Confirmatory Phase was to test the validity of IS-Impact Model and CNQ Model. To achieve that, IS-Impact, CNQ, and IS-Satisfaction were operationalized in a survey instrument, and then the research model was assessed by employing the Partial Least Squares (PLS) approach. The CNQ model was validated as a formative model. Similarly, the IS-Impact Model was validated as a hierarchical multidimensional formative construct. However, the analysis indicated that one of the IS-Impact Model indicators was insignificant and can be removed from the model. Thus, the resulting Extended IS-Impact Model consists of 4 dimensions and 34 measures. Finally, the structural model was also assessed against two aspects: explanatory and predictive power. The analysis revealed that the path coefficient between CNQ and IS-Impact is significant with t-value= (4.826) and relatively strong with â = (0.426) with CNQ explaining 18% of the variance in IS-Impact. These results supported the hypothesis that CNQ is antecedent of IS-Impact. The study demonstrates that the quality of Computer Network affects the quality of the Enterprise System (ERP) and consequently the impacts of the system. Therefore, practitioners should pay attention to the Computer Network quality. Similarly, the path coefficient between IS-Impact and IS-Satisfaction was significant t-value = (17.79) and strong â = (0.744), with IS-Impact alone explaining 55% of the variance in Satisfaction, consistent with results of the original IS-Impact study (Gable et al., 2008). The research contributions include: (a) supporting the completeness and validity of IS-Impact Model as a Hierarchical Multi-dimensional Formative Measurement Model in the Saudi Arabian context, (b) operationalizing Computer Network Quality as conceptualized in the ITU-T Recommendation E.800 (ITU-T, 1993), (c) validating CNQ as a formative measurement model and as an antecedent of IS Impact, and (d) conceptualizing and validating IS-Satisfaction as a reflective measurement model and as an immediate consequence of IS Impact. The CNQ model provides a framework to perceptually measure Computer Network Quality from multiple perspectives. The CNQ model features an easy-to-understand, easy-to-use, and economical survey instrument.

Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the upper limb functional index

Background The Upper Limb Functional Index (ULFI) is an internationally widely used outcome measure with robust, valid psychometric properties. The purpose of study is to develop and validate a ULFI Spanish-version (ULFI-Sp). Methods A two stage observational study was conducted. The ULFI was cross-culturally adapted to Spanish through double forward and backward translations, the psychometric properties were then validated. Participants (n = 126) with various upper limb conditions of >12 weeks duration completed the ULFI-Sp, QuickDASH and the Euroqol Health Questionnaire 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D-3 L). The full sample determined internal consistency, concurrent criterion validity, construct validity and factor structure; a subgroup (n = 35) determined reliability at seven days. Results The ULFI-Sp demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.94) and reliability (r = 0.93). Factor structure was one-dimensional and supported construct validity. Criterion validity with the EQ-5D-3 L was fair and inversely correlated (r = −0.59). The QuickDASH data was unavailable for analysis due to excessive missing responses. Conclusions The ULFI-Sp is a valid upper limb outcome measure with similar psychometric properties to the English language version.

Extending the validity of the Feeding Practices and Structure Questionnaire

Background Feeding practices are commonly examined as potentially modifiable determinants of children’s eating behaviours and weight status. Although a variety of questionnaires exist to assess different feeding aspects, many lack thorough reliability and validity testing. The Feeding Practices and Structure Questionnaire (FPSQ) is a tool designed to measure early feeding practices related to non-responsive feeding and structure of the meal environment. Face validity, factorial validity, internal reliability and cross-sectional correlations with children’s eating behaviours have been established in mothers with 2-year-old children. The aim of the present study was to further extend the validity of the FPSQ by examining factorial, construct and predictive validity, and stability. Methods Participants were from the NOURISH randomised controlled trial which evaluated an intervention with first-time mothers designed to promote protective feeding practices. Maternal feeding practices (FP) and child eating behaviours were assessed when children were aged 2 years and 3.7 years (n=388). Confirmatory Factor analysis, group differences, predictive relationships, and stability were tested. Results The original 9-factor structure was confirmed when children were aged 3.7±0.3 years. Cronbach’s alpha was above the recommended 0.70 cut-off for all factors except Structured Meal Timing, Over Restriction and Distrust in Appetite which were 0.58, 0.67 and 0.66 respectively. Allocated group differences reflected behaviour consistent with intervention content and all feeding practices were stable across both time points (range of r= 0.45-0.70). There was some evidence for the predictive validity of factors with 2 FP showing expected relationships, 2 FP showing expected and unexpected relationships and 5 FP showing no relationship. Conclusions Reliability and validity was demonstrated for most subscales of the FPSQ. Future validation is warranted with culturally diverse samples and with fathers and other caregivers. The use of additional outcomes to further explore predictive validity is recommended as well as testing construct validity and test-retest reliability of the questionnaire.