Measurement invariance

测量不变性
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    本研究旨在进一步研究匈牙利大学生样本中UDRQ的因素结构和测量不变性。
    首先,在837名匈牙利大学生中检查了UDRQ的因素结构。具体来说,构建并比较了两种测量模型(一阶模型和二阶模型)。其次,检查了UDRQ的内部一致性可靠性。第三,对UDRQ的测量不变性进行了性别评估。最后,在两个不同的样品中评估了UDRQ的测量不变性。
    发现一阶模型优于二阶模型,并且更好地代表了UDRQ子量表的因子结构。Cronbachα和复合信度的结果表明,两个UDRQ分量表的内部一致性可靠性令人满意。测量不变性分析表明,UDRQ测量模型在性别和样本之间是严格不变的。
    本研究的结果表明,UDRQ显示出令人满意的信度和效度,可用于评估匈牙利大学生的需求和资源。
    UNASSIGNED: The present study aimed to further examine the factor structure and measurement invariance of the UDRQ among a sample of Hungarian university students.
    UNASSIGNED: Firstly, the factor structure of the UDRQ was examined among 837 Hungarian university students. Specifically, two measurement models (first-order model and second-order model) were constructed and compared. Secondly, the internal consistency reliability of the UDRQ was examined. Thirdly, measurement invariance of the UDRQ was evaluated across genders. Finally, measurement invariance of the UDRQ was evaluated across two different samples.
    UNASSIGNED: It was found that the first-order model outperformed the second-order model and better represented the factor structure of the UDRQ subscales. Results of Cronbach\'s alpha and Composite Reliability suggested that the internal consistency reliabilities of the two UDRQ subscales were satisfactory. Measurement invariance analysis revealed that the UDRQ measurement model was strict invariant across genders and samples.
    UNASSIGNED: The findings of the present study indicated that the UDRQ displayed satisfactory reliability and validity and could be used to assess demands and resources of Hungarian university students.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    修订的精神病检查表(PCL-R)和精神病检查表:青年版(PCL:YV),分别,是用于评估精神病和精神病倾向发展的既定工具。为了可靠地比较两种仪器的分数,必须建立测量不变性。当前的研究涉及来自新墨西哥州教养所的1091名男性参与者(成人=813;青少年=278)的组合样本。使用探索性结构方程模型(ESEM)框架来测试测量不变性。四因素ESEM模型证明了组合样品和单独样品的良好拟合。来自多组ESEM的结果提供了通常很强的不变性的证据,具有等效的因子负荷和阈值。青少年表现出潜在的人际关系特征减少,但在其他PCL因素上的潜在特征增加(情感,生活方式,和反社会)与成年人相比。研究结果表明,四因素模型和精神病特征的测量在各个年龄段保持一致。讨论了研究结果在研究和临床环境中的含义。
    Both the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) and the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV), respectively, are established instruments for assessment of psychopathy and development of psychopathic propensity. To reliably compare scores from both instruments, measurement invariance must be established. The current study involved a combined sample of 1091 male participants (adults = 813; adolescents = 278) from correctional facilities in New Mexico. An exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) framework was used to test for measurement invariance. The four-factor ESEM model demonstrated good fit for the combined and individual samples. Results from the multiple group ESEM provide evidence for generally strong invariance, with equivalent factor loadings and thresholds. Adolescents exhibited decreased latent interpersonal traits but increased latent features on other PCL factors (affective, lifestyle, and antisocial) compared to adults. Findings suggest that the four-factor model and the measurement of psychopathic traits remain consistent across age groups. Implications of the findings within research and clinical contexts are discussed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    心理测量学家认为,需要进行测量不变性(MI)测试才能知道是否在不同的组中测量了相同的心理构造。来自五个实验的数据允许测试该位置。在第一,参与者回答了关于自由意志信仰的问卷,以及生活的意义或一个名为“gavagai”的无意义概念的含义。“由于生命的意义和gavagai的意义在概念上不同,当治疗组的测量结果相同时,应该违反MI。MI被严重侵犯,表明问卷的解释不同。在第二个和第三个实验中,参与者随机观看解释图形矩阵规则的治疗视频或与任务无关的对照视频.然后,参与者进行了智力和图形矩阵测试。干预有效,实验组以了解矩阵规则的形式对图形矩阵性能产生了额外的影响,因此,他们在矩阵测试中的表现违反了MI,并且智力水平异常高。在这两个实验中,MI被严重侵犯。在第四和第五个实验中,个体接受了成长心态干预,一项孪生研究显示,在不影响其他变量的情况下,改变了目标心态测量中的遗传变异量.当比较治疗组和对照组时,MI在治疗前可达到,但在治疗后不可达到。此外,对照组表现出纵向不变性,但治疗组的情况并非如此。MI测试可能能够显示是否在不同的组中测量相同的东西。
    Psychometricians have argued that measurement invariance (MI) testing is needed to know if the same psychological constructs are measured in different groups. Data from five experiments allowed that position to be tested. In the first, participants answered questionnaires on belief in free will and either the meaning of life or the meaning of a nonsense concept called \"gavagai.\" Since the meaning of life and the meaning of gavagai conceptually differ, MI should have been violated when groups were treated like their measurements were identical. MI was severely violated, indicating the questionnaires were interpreted differently. In the second and third experiments, participants were randomized to watch treatment videos explaining figural matrices rules or task-irrelevant control videos. Participants then took intelligence and figural matrices tests. The intervention worked and the experimental group had an additional influence on figural matrix performance in the form of knowing matrix rules, so their performance on the matrices tests violated MI and was anomalously high for their intelligence levels. In both experiments, MI was severely violated. In the fourth and fifth experiments, individuals were exposed to growth mindset interventions that a twin study revealed changed the amount of genetic variance in the target mindset measure without affecting other variables. When comparing treatment and control groups, MI was attainable before but not after treatment. Moreover, the control group showed longitudinal invariance, but the same was untrue for the treatment group. MI testing is likely able to show if the same things are measured in different groups.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    慢性背痛是一种常见且致残的健康问题。有证据表明,卫生专业人员对慢性腰背痛的无知和错误信念会干扰患有这种疼痛的人的治疗。医疗保健提供者疼痛和损害关系量表(HC-PAIRS)一直是评估这些错误信念最常用的量表之一。但在拉丁美洲还没有研究报告。方法:我们研究了两个拉丁美洲国家:哥伦比亚(n=930)和智利(n=190)的卫生人员和健康科学大学生中HC-PAIRS的阶乘结构。西班牙的数据是对HC-PAIRS西班牙语版本的原始研究(171名物理治疗学生)。此外,智利之间该量表的测量不变性,哥伦比亚和西班牙通过计算三个嵌套模型进行了评估:配置,公制和标量。我们在两个拉丁美洲样本中使用了验证性因子分析(CFA),用最大似然鲁棒(MLR)估计来估计参数。对于每个样本中的最终模型,可靠性用综合可靠性(CR)指数进行评估,为了获得由尺度解释的方差比例,计算了平均方差提取(AVE)。
    单因素解决方案在删除项目1、6和14后,在两个国家中都显示出可接受的配合。对于生成的比例,CR值足够,但是AVE很低。智利和哥伦比亚之间存在标量不变性,但不是在这两个国家和西班牙之间。
    HC-PAIRS可用于检测有关慢性下腰痛之间关系的误解,这些误解会导致卫生人员向患者提供错误的建议。然而,它有心理测量的弱点,建议获取其他有效性证据。
    UNASSIGNED: Chronic back pain is a frequent and disabling health problem. There is evidence that ignorance and erroneous beliefs about chronic low back pain among health professionals interfere in the treatment of people who suffer from it. The Health Care Providers\' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) has been one of the most used scale to assess these misbeliefs, but no studies have been reported in Latin America. Method: We studied the factorial structure of the HC-PAIRS in health personnel and health sciences university students in two Latin American countries: Colombia (n = 930) and Chile (n = 190). Spain\'s data was taken of the original study of the Spanish version of the HC-PAIRS (171 Physiotherapy students). Additionally, the measurement invariance of this scale among Chile, Colombia and Spain was evaluated by calculating three nested models: configural, metric and scalar. We used a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) in both Latin American samples, with Maximum Likelihood Robust (MLR) estimation to estimate the parameters. For the final model in each sample, reliability was assessed with the Composite Reliability (CR) index, and to obtain the proportion of variance explained by the scale the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) was calculated.
    UNASSIGNED: The one-factor solution shows an acceptable fit in both countries after deleting items 1, 6, and 14. For the resulting scale, the CR value is adequate, but the AVE is low. There is scalar invariance between Chile and Colombia, but not between these two countries and Spain.
    UNASSIGNED: HC-PAIRS is useful for detecting misconceptions about the relationship between chronic low back pain that would cause health personnel to give wrong recommendations to patients. However, it has psychometric weaknesses, and it is advisable to obtain other evidence of validity.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目前的研究提出了参与运动训练量表(EATS)的开发过程和初步验证,旨在评估运动员在运动训练中的参与度。在研究1中,实现了EATS的项目生成和初始内容效度。在研究2中,使用探索性因子分析(EFA)和探索性结构方程模型(ESEM)检查了EATS的因子结构。检查了分量表的内部一致性可靠性(N=460)。在研究3中,因子结构,判别效度,内部一致性可靠性,在一个独立的样本(N=513)中进一步检查了EATS的法理有效性。同时,评估了样本(研究2和研究3)和性别之间的EATS测量不变性。总的来说,3项严格研究的结果为19项EATS提供了初步的心理测量证据,并表明EATS可以用作评估运动员参与运动训练的有效和可靠的措施。
    The current study presents the development process and initial validation of the Engagement in Athletic Training Scale (EATS), which was designed to evaluate athletes\' engagement in athletic training. In study 1, item generation and initial content validity of the EATS were achieved. In study 2, the factor structure of the EATS was examined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM). Internal consistency reliabilities of the subscales were examined (N = 460). In study 3, factor structure, discriminant validity, internal consistency reliability, and nomological validity of the EATS were further examined in an independent sample (N = 513). Meanwhile, measurement invariance of the EATS across samples (study 2 and study 3) and genders was evaluated. Overall, results from the 3 rigorous studies provided initial psychometric evidence for the 19-item EATS and suggested that the EATS could be used as a valid and reliable measure to evaluate athletes\' engagement in athletic training.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    (1)背景:自闭症谱系障碍儿童的父母经常经历心理困扰,这会影响他们提供的育儿质量。在这些父母中筛查精神症状至关重要。核心症状指数(CSI)是一种广泛认可的工具,用于评估一般症状,包括抑郁症,焦虑,和躯体问题。它已在不同的泰国人群中证明了有效性和可靠性。鉴于泰国和中国人口之间的文化相似性,CSI已在中国人口中成功实施。然而,研究其在一般中国人群中的效度和信度至关重要。本研究旨在使用验证性因子分析(CFA)研究中文版CSI在自闭症谱系障碍儿童父母中的心理测量特性。(2)方法:794名中国孤独症患儿家长参与本研究。全部完成CSI,以及“人际问题清单”和“夫妻满意度指数”的社会抑制子量表。使用CFA评估因子效度,以确定双因子三因素模型拟合数据的程度。使用模型拟合指数比较了各种结构模型。通过探索与社会抑制子量表和夫妻满意度指数的相关性,检查了收敛效度和判别效度。CSI的不变性测试基于性别跨多个组进行,年龄,和使用CFA的教育。使用McDonald的omega系数评估CSI的可靠性。(3)结果:双因子模型成为数据的最佳拟合模型,表明CSI的总分足以代表总体精神症状。CSI与社会抑制子量表(r=0.41,p<0.01)显着相关,与夫妻满意度指数(r=-0.16,p<0.05)的相关系数较小。同时表示收敛效度和判别效度。不变测试结果支持基于性别和年龄的标量不变性水平,但仅支持部分教育不变性。中文版本的CSI显示出高度的一致性,麦当劳的欧米茄系数在0.86到0.95之间。(4)结论:对中文版CSI的双因子模型进行了验证,使其成为测量凹陷的合适工具,焦虑,自闭症谱系障碍儿童父母的躯体化症状。鼓励对其他中国人群进行进一步研究。
    (1) Background: Parents of children with autism spectrum disorders often experience psychological distress, which can affect the quality of childcare they provide. It is crucial to screen for psychiatric symptoms among these parents. The core symptom index (CSI) is a widely recognized tool used to assess general symptoms, including depression, anxiety, and somatic issues. It has proven validity and reliability across diverse Thai populations. Given the cultural similarities between Thai and Chinese populations, the CSI has been successfully implemented within the Chinese population. Nevertheless, it is crucial to research its validity and reliability in the general Chinese population. This study aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the CSI among parents of children with autism spectrum disorders using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). (2) Methods: A total of 794 Chinese parents raising children with autism participated in this study. All completed the CSI, along with the social inhibition subscale of the Interpersonal Problems Inventory and the Couple Satisfaction Index. Factorial validity was assessed using CFA to determine how well the bifactor three-factor model fits the data. Various structural models were compared using model fit indices. Convergent and discriminant validity were examined by exploring correlations with the social inhibition subscale and the Couple Satisfaction Index. Invariance testing of the CSI was conducted across multiple groups based on gender, age, and education using CFA. The reliability of the CSI was evaluated using McDonald\'s omega coefficients. (3) Results: The bifactor model emerged as the best-fitting model for the data, suggesting that the total score of the CSI adequately represents overall psychiatric symptoms. The CSI exhibited significant correlations with the social inhibition subscale (r = 0.41, p < 0.01) and smaller correlation coefficients with the Couple Satisfaction Index (r = -0.16, p < 0.05), indicating both convergent and discriminant validity. The invariant test results support scalar invariance levels based on gender and age but only partial invariance for education. The Chinese version of the CSI demonstrated high consistency, with McDonald\'s omega coefficients ranging between 0.86 and 0.95. (4) Conclusions: The bifactor model of the Chinese version of the CSI is validated, making it a suitable tool for measuring depression, anxiety, and somatization symptoms among parent(s) of children with autism spectrum disorders. Further research on other Chinese populations is encouraged.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    拟合指数是描述性指标,可以帮助评估验证性因子分析(CFA)模型对研究人员数据的拟合程度。在多组模型中,在进行组间比较之前,拟合指数可用于通过评估多组数据与越来越约束的嵌套模型的一致性程度来评估测量不变性。一个这样的拟合指数是被称为RMSEAD的近似均方根误差(RMSEA)的适配。该索引将卡方和自由度差异嵌入到修改的RMSEA公式中。本研究全面比较了RMSEAD与ΔRMSEA,与嵌套模型的比较关联的两个RMSEA值之间的差异。比较包括两种推导以及使用单因素CFA模型的人口分析,这些模型具有与实际研究中发现的特征相同的特征。研究结果表明,对于相同的模型,随着指示变量数量的增加,RMSEAD相对于ΔRMSEA的灵敏度总是会增加。研究还表明,在单因素模型中,RMSEAD检测相对于ΔRMSEA的非不变性的能力增强。由于这些原因,在评估测量不变性时,建议使用RMSEAD代替ΔRMSEA。
    Fit indices are descriptive measures that can help evaluate how well a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model fits a researcher\'s data. In multigroup models, before between-group comparisons are made, fit indices may be used to evaluate measurement invariance by assessing the degree to which multiple groups\' data are consistent with increasingly constrained nested models. One such fit index is an adaptation of the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) called RMSEAD. This index embeds the chi-square and degree-of-freedom differences into a modified RMSEA formula. The present study comprehensively compared RMSEAD to ΔRMSEA, the difference between two RMSEA values associated with a comparison of nested models. The comparison consisted of both derivations as well as a population analysis using one-factor CFA models with features common to those found in practical research. The findings demonstrated that for the same model, RMSEAD will always have increased sensitivity relative to ΔRMSEA with an increasing number of indicator variables. The study also indicated that RMSEAD had increased ability to detect noninvariance relative to ΔRMSEA in one-factor models. For these reasons, when evaluating measurement invariance, RMSEAD is recommended instead of ΔRMSEA.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:鉴于在线卫生资源的迅速扩散和使用,其中许多可能质量可疑,越来越需要在互联网用户人群中发展电子健康素养(e-healthtycodity)技能。电子健康素养包括获取所需的技能和能力,理解,验证,评估,解释,并应用在线健康相关信息。衡量电子健康素养对于制定有针对性的干预措施至关重要,评估其影响,并产生高质量的研究结果,可以为卫生政策和临床实践提供信息,这可以改善健康结果,并有可能减少健康不平等。这些量表必须是有效和可靠的,以便决策基于高质量的数据。在这方面,不同人口群体之间量表的测量不变性问题被忽视了。这是至关重要的,因为评估在不同的社会人口统计学群体中应该是有效的,以避免在比较它们时出现偏见。这项研究的目的是验证扩展的电子健康素养量表(eHEALS-E)在一般人群中,并调查其结构效度和内部一致性,从收敛效度和判别效度的角度构建效度,并检查其跨性别的测量不变性,年龄,教育和社会地位。
    方法:数据是作为斯洛文尼亚国家公共卫生研究所进行的全国健康素养调查的一部分收集的。对于这项调查,对最初的eHEALS-E量表进行了修订,以解决其局限性和对普通人群的适用性。根据具有全国代表性的样本,分析的最终样本包括1,944名个人,他们至少偶尔使用各种互联网服务之一来获取与健康相关的信息。使用多组验证性因子分析来检查量表的测量不变性。
    结果:经过一些调整,修订的6维eHEALS-E量表的测量模型显示出与数据的良好拟合(χ2=2508,df=282,RMSEA=0.064,SRMR=0.070,CFI=0.90)。量表具有良好的内部一致性(α=0.89)。虽然部分提供了量表收敛有效性和判别有效性的证据,分析揭示了不同社会人口统计学群体的稳健测量不变性。
    结论:有一个小的限制,该量表确保对不同社会群体进行公正的电子健康素养评估,这对于旨在减少与健康相关的社会不平等的干预措施至关重要。这确保了从现实评估中得出的干预措施对每个人都同样有效和有效,不管他们的社会人口背景。
    BACKGROUND: Given the rapid proliferation and use of online health resources, many of which may be of dubious quality, there is an increasing need to develop electronic health literacy (e-health literacy) skills among the population of internet users. E-health literacy encompasses the skills and abilities needed to access, understand, validate, evaluate, interpret, and apply online health-related information. Measuring e-health literacy has become crucial for developing targeted interventions, assessing their impact, and producing high-quality research findings that can inform health policy and clinical practice, which can lead to improved health outcomes and potentially reducing health inequalities. The scales need to be valid and reliable so that decisions are based on high-quality data. In this regard, the issue of the measurement invariance of scales across different demographic groups has been neglected. This is critical, as assessments should be valid across different sociodemographic groups to avoid bias when comparing them. The aim of this study was to validate the Extended e-health literacy scale (eHEALS-E) on general population and investigate its structural validity and internal consistency, construct validity in terms of convergent and discriminant validity, and examine its measurement invariance across gender, age, education and social status.
    METHODS: The data were collected as a part of a national health literacy survey conducted by the Slovenian National Institute of Public Health. For this survey the initial eHEALS-E scale was revised in order to address its limitations and applicability to general population. Based on a nationally representative sample, the final sample for the analysis comprised 1,944 individuals who at least occasionally used one of the various internet services to obtain health-related information. Multiple group confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine the measurement invariance of the scale.
    RESULTS: With some adjustments, the measurement model of the revised 6-dimensional eHEALS-E scale demonstrated a good fit to the data (χ2 = 2508, df = 282, RMSEA = 0.064, SRMR = 0.070, CFI = 0.90). The scale had good internal consistency (alpha = 0.89). Although evidence of the scale\'s convergent and discriminant validity was partially provided, the analysis revealed robust measurement invariance across sociodemographic groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: With a minor limitation, the scale ensures an unbiased e-health literacy assessment across different social groups, which is crucial for interventions that aim to reduce health-related social inequalities. This ensures that the interventions derived from the assessment of reality are equally valid and effective for everyone, regardless of their sociodemographic background.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:睡眠状况指标(SCI),基于更新的精神疾病诊断和统计手册的失眠测量工具,第五版(DSM-5)标准具有健全的心理测量特性,适用于各种人群,在这里对医疗保健学生进行了纵向评估,证明其在这个特别高风险人群中的测量特性和不变性。
    方法:招募了一所中国大学的医疗保健学生参加这项两波纵向研究,完成简体中文版本的SCI(SCI-SC),中国规律,满意,警觉性,定时,效率,持续时间(RU_SATED-C)刻度,中国患者健康问卷-4(PHQ-4-C),和2022年9月至11月的社会人口统计学变量问卷(Q-SV)。结构有效性,测量不变性(MI),收敛效度和判别效度,内部一致性,并对SCI-SC的重测信度进行了检查。性别分组,年龄,homelocation,兼职工作,体育锻炼,并对压力应对策略进行了两次调查,以测试横截面和纵向MI。
    结果:我们确定了343个有效应答(62.9%为女性,平均年龄=19.650±1.414岁),时间间隔为7天。双因素结构被认为是令人满意的(比较拟合指数=0.953-0.989,塔克-刘易斯指数=0.931-0.984,逼近的均方根误差=0.040-0.092,标准化均方根残差=0.039-0.054),除了兼职工作小组外,大多数人都支持严格的不变性,因此建立纵向不变性。SCI-SC在RU_SATED-C量表(r≥0.500)下表现出可接受的收敛有效性,PHQ-4-C(0.300≤r<0.500)的判别效度,内部稠度(克朗巴赫的α=0.811-0.835,麦当劳的ω=0.805-0.832),和重测信度(组内相关系数=0.829)。
    结论:SCI-SC是一种合适的筛查工具,可用于评估医疗保健学生的失眠症状,和有前途的测量属性提供了额外的证据,关于有效性和可靠性检测保健学生失眠。
    BACKGROUND: The Sleep Condition Indicator (SCI), an insomnia measurement tool based on the updated Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria with sound psychometric properties when applied in various populations, was evaluated here among healthcare students longitudinally, to demonstrate its measurement properties and invariance in this particularly high-risk population.
    METHODS: Healthcare students of a Chinese university were recruited into this two-wave longitudinal study, completing the simplified Chinese version of the SCI (SCI-SC), Chinese Regularity, Satisfaction, Alertness, Timing, Efficiency, Duration (RU_SATED-C) scale, Chinese Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4-C), and sociodemographic variables questionnaire (Q-SV) between September and November 2022. Structural validity, measurement invariance (MI), convergent and discriminant validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability of the SCI-SC were examined. Subgroups of gender, age, home location, part-time job, physical exercise, and stress-coping strategy were surveyed twice to test cross-sectional and longitudinal MI.
    RESULTS: We identified 343 valid responses (62.9% female, mean age = 19.650 ± 1.414 years) with a time interval of seven days. The two-factor structure was considered satisfactory (comparative fit index = 0.953-0.989, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.931-0.984, root means square error of approximation = 0.040-0.092, standardized root mean square residual = 0.039-0.054), which mostly endorsed strict invariance except for part-time job subgroups, hence establishing longitudinal invariance. The SCI-SC presented acceptable convergent validity with the RU_SATED-C scale (r ≥ 0.500), discriminant validity with the PHQ-4-C (0.300 ≤ r < 0.500), internal consistency (Cronbach\'s alpha = 0.811-0.835, McDonald\'s omega = 0.805-0.832), and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.829).
    CONCLUSIONS: The SCI-SC is an appropriate screening instrument available for assessing insomnia symptoms among healthcare students, and the promising measurement properties provide additional evidence about validity and reliability for detecting insomnia in healthcare students.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:鉴于最近关于自闭症表现的性别差异的证据,越来越多的人担心,目前的自闭症工具不能充分捕捉女性常见的特征。如果自闭症工具仅根据性别对自闭症特征进行不同的测量,它们的有效性可能会受到损害,因为它们可能无法跨性别测量相同的结构。自闭症测量的测量不变性调查可以帮助评估自闭症结构对不同性别的有效性。这项系统评价的目的是确定并批判性地评估所有符合两个标准的成人自闭症自我报告工具的心理测量特性:(a)自NICE(2014)建议以来已发布或包含这些工具,以及(b)作为其验证过程的一部分,他们接受了与性别相关的测量不变性调查。
    方法:从2014年到现在,将使用MEDLINE进行电子数据库的搜索,Embase,和PsycINFO使用预定义的搜索词来识别符合条件的研究。灰色文献的搜索将包括OpenGrey、APAPsycEXTRA,还有Scopus.两名审阅者将独立筛选标题,摘要,以及资格的全文。将搜索纳入研究的参考文献以获取其他记录。研究的方法学质量将使用COSMIN风险偏差清单进行评估,而心理测量结果的质量将根据良好的测量特性和ConPsy检查表进行评估。将使用修订后的GRADE指南中概述的方法评估全部证据的质量。
    结论:这项系统评价将是首次评估自NICE(2014)指南发布以来(或包含在其中)的成人自闭症自我报告测量的心理测量特性和性别相关测量不变性。该评论将为评估无性别偏见的自闭症的最合适工具提供建议。如果没有发现这样的措施,它将确定具有有希望的心理测量特性的现有工具,需要进一步测试,或建议制定一项新措施。
    背景:该方案已在国际前瞻性系统审查注册(PROSPERO)上注册。注册号为CRD42023429350。
    BACKGROUND: Given the recent evidence on gender differences in the presentation of autism, there is an increasing concern that current tools for autism do not adequately capture traits more often found in women. If tools for autism measure autistic traits differently based on gender alone, their validity may be compromised as they may not be measuring the same construct across genders. Measurement invariance investigations of autism measures can help assess the validity of autism constructs for different genders. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and critically appraise the psychometric properties of all self-report tools for autism in adults that meet two criteria: (a) they have been published since or included in the NICE (2014) recommendations, and (b) they have undergone gender-related measurement invariance investigations as part of their validation process.
    METHODS: A search of electronic databases will be conducted from 2014 until the present using MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO using predefined search terms to identify eligible studies. The search for grey literature will include sources such as OpenGrey, APA PsycEXTRA, and Scopus. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility. The references of included studies will be searched for additional records. The methodological quality of the studies will be evaluated using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, while psychometric quality of findings will be assessed based on criteria for good measurement properties and ConPsy checklist. The quality of the total body of evidence will be appraised using the approach outlined in the modified GRADE guidelines.
    CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review will be among the first to assess the psychometric properties and gender-related measurement invariance of self-reported measures for autism in adults that were published since (or included in) NICE (2014) guidelines. The review will provide recommendations for the most suitable tool to assess for autism without gender bias. If no such measure is found, it will identify existing tools with promising psychometric properties that require further testing, or suggest developing a new measure.
    BACKGROUND: The protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The registration number is CRD42023429350.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号