AN INVESTIGATION OF THE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF THE CENTER FOR EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES DEPRESSION SCALE IN THREE ETHNIC GROUPS

Epidemiologic studies of mental disorder have called attention to the need for identifying untreated cases and to the inadequacies of the instruments available for this purpose. Accurate case ascertainment devices are the basis of sound epidemiology. Without these, neither case classification nor analytic studies of risk factors is possible.^ The purpose of this research was to examine the reliability and validity of an instrument designed to measure depressive symptoms in community populations--the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D Scale). Two particular foci of the study were whether or not the scale had the same statistical structure across three ethnic groups and whether or not the magnitude and pattern of rates of symptoms for these groups were affected by one source of response error, that due to response tendencies. The effects of age and education on the pattern and magnitude of rates also were examined. In addition, the reliability and validity of the measures of response tendencies were assessed.^ The study population consisted of residents of Alameda County, California. A stratified sample of approximately 700 whites, blacks and Mexican-Americans was interviewed in the summer and fall of 1978.^ The results of the analysis indicated that the scale was reliable and measured a similar content domain across the three ethnic groups. The unadjusted sex- and ethnic-specific rates of depressive symptoms showed an ethnic pattern for both sexes: rates for whites were lowest, those for Mexican-Americans were highest, and those for blacks were intermediate. Measures of response tendencies--need for social approval, trait desirability, and acquiescence--affected the magnitude of the rates for most comparisons. Likewise, the pattern of rates changed somewhat from that originally observed. The one fairly consistent observation was that rates for Mexican-American women were higher than those for the other two female subgroups in most of the comparisons. These results must be considered in the context of the reliability and validity assessment of the measures of response tendencies which indicated the tenuousness of these measures.^ Age affected the ethnic pattern of rates for men in an inconsistent way; for women, Mexican-Americans continued to have higher rates than whites or blacks in all age categories. Education affected the magnitude of rates for women but not for men. For both men and women, Mexican-Americans had higher rates in all educational strata. Rates for women showed an inverse association with education while those for men did not. ^

Validity of using item response theory to analyze data from the Work Limitations Questionnaire

The Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) is used to determine the amount of work loss and productivity which stem from certain health conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis and cancer. The questionnaire is currently scored using methodology from Classical Test Theory. Item Response Theory, on the other hand, is a theory based on analyzing item responses. This study wanted to determine the validity of using Item Response Theory (IRT), to analyze data from the WLQ. Item responses from 572 employed adults with dysthymia, major depressive disorder (MDD), double depressive disorder (both dysthymia and MDD), rheumatoid arthritis and healthy individuals were used to determine the validity of IRT (Adler et al., 2006).^ PARSCALE, which is IRT software from Scientific Software International, Inc., was used to calculate estimates of the work limitations based on item responses from the WLQ. These estimates, also known as ability estimates, were then correlated with the raw score estimates calculated from the sum of all the items responses. Concurrent validity, which claims a measurement is valid if the correlation between the new measurement and the valid measurement is greater or equal to .90, was used to determine the validity of IRT methodology for the WLQ. Ability estimates from IRT were found to be somewhat highly correlated with the raw scores from the WLQ (above .80). However, the only subscale which had a high enough correlation for IRT to be considered valid was the time management subscale (r = .90). All other subscales, mental/interpersonal, physical, and output, did not produce valid IRT ability estimates.^ An explanation for these lower than expected correlations can be explained by the outliers found in the sample. Also, acquiescent responding (AR) bias, which is caused by the tendency for people to respond the same way to every question on a questionnaire, and the multidimensionality of the questionnaire (the WLQ is composed of four dimensions and thus four different latent variables) probably had a major impact on the IRT estimates. Furthermore, it is possible that the mental/interpersonal dimension violated the monotonocity assumption of IRT causing PARSCALE to fail to run for these estimates. The monotonicity assumption needs to be checked for the mental/interpersonal dimension. Furthermore, the use of multidimensional IRT methods would most likely remove the AR bias and increase the validity of using IRT to analyze data from the WLQ.^

Predictive validity of the personal background and preparation survey and effectiveness of targeted interventions among health science community college students

Existing data, collected from 1st-year students enrolled in a major Health Science Community College in the south central United States, for Fall 2010, Spring 2011, Fall 2011 and Spring 2012 semesters as part of the "Online Navigational Assessment Vehicle, Intervention Guidance, and Targeting of Risks (NAVIGATOR) for Undergraduate Minority Student Success" with CPHS approval number HSC-GEN-07-0158, was used for this thesis. The Personal Background and Preparation Survey (PBPS) and a two-question risk self-assessment subscale were administered to students during their 1st-year orientation. The PBPS total risk score, risk self-assessment total and overall scores, and Under Representative Minority Student (URMS) status were recorded. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and report the predictive validity of the indicators identified above for Adverse Academic Status Events (AASE) and Nonadvancement Adverse Academic Status Events (NAASE) as well as the effectiveness of interventions targeted using the PBPS among a diverse population of health science community college students. The predictive validity of the PBPS for AASE has previously been demonstrated among health science professions and graduate students (Johnson, Johnson, Kim, & McKee, 2009a; Johnson, Johnson, McKee, & Kim, 2009b). Data will be analyzed using binary logistic regression and correlation using SPSS 19 statistical package. Independent variables will include baseline- versus intervention-year treatments, PBPS, risk self-assessment, and URMS status. The dependent variables will be binary AASE and NAASE status. ^ The PBPS was the first reliable diagnostic and prescriptive instrument to establish documented predictive validity for student Adverse Academic Status Events (AASE) among students attending health science professional schools. These results extend the documented validity for the PBPS in predicting AASE to a health science community college student population. Results further demonstrated that interventions introduced using the PBPS were followed by approximately one-third reduction in the odds of Nonadvancement Adverse Academic Status Events (NAASE), controlling for URMS status and risk self-assessment scores. These results indicate interventions introduced using the PBPS may have potential to reduce AASE or attrition among URMS and nonURMS attending health science community colleges on a broader scale; positively impacting costs, shortages, and diversity of health science professionals.^

Face, content, and construct validity of the EndoViS training system for objective assessment of psychomotor skills of laparoscopic surgeons

Background The aim of this study is to present face, content, and constructs validity of the endoscopic orthogonal video system (EndoViS) training system and determines its efficiency as a training and objective assessment tool of the surgeons’ psychomotor skills. Methods Thirty-five surgeons and medical students participated in this study: 11 medical students, 19 residents, and 5 experts. All participants performed four basic skill tasks using conventional laparoscopic instruments and EndoViS training system. Subsequently, participants filled out a questionnaire regarding the design, realism, overall functionality, and its capabilities to train hand–eye coordination and depth perception, rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Motion data of the instruments were obtained by means of two webcams built into a laparoscopic physical trainer. To identify the surgical instruments in the images, colored markers were placed in each instrument. Thirteen motion-related metrics were used to assess laparoscopic performance of the participants. Statistical analysis of performance was made between novice, intermediate, and expert groups. Internal consistency of all metrics was analyzed with Cronbach’s α test. Results Overall scores about features of the EndoViS system were positives. Participants agreed with the usefulness of tasks and the training capacities of EndoViS system (score >4). Results presented significant differences in the execution of three skill tasks performed by participants. Seven metrics showed construct validity for assessment of performance with high consistency levels. Conclusions EndoViS training system has been successfully validated. Results showed that EndoViS was able to differentiate between participants of varying laparoscopic experience. This simulator is a useful and effective tool to objectively assess laparoscopic psychomotor skills of the surgeons.

Is there any evidence for the validity of diagnostic criteria used for accommodative and nonstrabismic binocular dysfunctions?

Purpose: To analyze the diagnostic criteria used in the scientific literature published in the past 25 years for accommodative and nonstrabismic binocular dysfunctions and to explore if the epidemiological analysis of diagnostic validity has been used to propose which clinical criteria should be used for diagnostic purposes. Methods: We carried out a systematic review of papers on accommodative and non-strabic binocular disorders published from 1986 to 2012 analysing the MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and FRANCIS databases. We admitted original articles about diagnosis of these anomalies in any population. We identified 839 articles and 12 studies were included. The quality of included articles was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Results: The review shows a wide range of clinical signs and cut-off points between authors. Only 3 studies (regarding accommodative anomalies) assessed diagnostic accuracy of clinical signs. Their results suggest using the accommodative amplitude and monocular accommodative facility for diagnosing accommodative insufficiency and a high positive relative accommodation for accommodative excess. The remaining 9 articles did not analyze diagnostic accuracy, assessing a diagnosis with the criteria the authors considered. We also found differences between studies in the way of considering patients’ symptomatology. 3 studies of 12 analyzed, performed a validation of a symptom survey used for convergence insufficiency. Conclusions: Scientific literature reveals differences between authors according to diagnostic criteria for accommodative and nonstrabismic binocular dysfunctions. Diagnostic accuracy studies show that there is only certain evidence for accommodative conditions. For binocular anomalies there is only evidence about a validated questionnaire for convergence insufficiency with no data of diagnostic accuracy.

A systematic review of characteristics and validity of monitoring technologies to assess Parkinson’s disease symptoms and signs

Trabalho Final do Curso de Mestrado Integrado em Medicina, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, 2014