Assessing illness-related uncertainty in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: A psychometric analysis of the Mishel Uncertainty of Illness Scale

A multicenter study involving 204 adults with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) assessed the dimensionality and item characteristics of the Mishel-Uncertainty of Illness Scale (MUIS), a generic self-assessment tool. Mokken analysis identified two dimensions in the MUIS with an appropriate item and overall scale scalability after excluding nonclassifiable items. A refined 12-item MUIS, employing a grade response model, effectively discriminated uncertainty levels among RRMS patients (likelihood ratio test p-value = .03). These findings suggest the potential value of the 12-item MUIS as a reliable measure for assessing uncertainty associated with the course of illness in RRMS.

Assessing care-related regret among nurses specialized in multiple sclerosis: A psychometric analysis of a new assessment battery

Experiences of regret associated with caring for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) can affect medical decisions. A non-interventional study was conducted to assess the dimensionality and item characteristics of a battery including the Regret Intensity Scale (RIS-10) and 15 items evaluating common situations experienced by nurses in MS care. A total of 97 nurses were included. The RIS-10 showed good internal reliability and a unidimensional structure according to Mokken analysis. All-item homogeneity coefficients exceeded 0.30, whereas scalability for the overall RIS-10 was 0.66, indicating a strong scale. This battery showed adequate psychometric properties to evaluate regret among MS nurses.

Development and initial validation of the diabetes family conflict scale (revised)-short form in a racially and income diverse sample

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the study was to develop a short form of the revised diabetes family conflict scale (DFCS) in a racially and income diverse sample while retaining strong psychometric properties.

METHODS

One seventy nine youth with type 1 diabetes (ages 12-18 years) and caregivers completed the DFCS-Revised as well as assessments of adherence, psychosocial functioning, and diabetes-related stress. Hemoglobin A1c was also obtained. The sample was split at random into a development sample and validation sample.

RESULTS

Confirmatory factor analyses in the validation sample supported the use of a six-item short form (DFCS-SF) either as a total score (6-items) or a direct (3-item) and indirect (3-item) score. Variations of the DFCS-SF (three items of the 6-item short form) also had acceptable model fit. The short-form questionnaires had acceptable internal consistency and convergent validity (6-item: Cronbach's a = 0.865, full scale DFCS r = 0.954; 3-item: Cronbach's a = 0.757, full scale DFCS r = 0.912). The DFCS-SF showed measurement invariance across both youth and caregiver respondents. Greater report of the DFCS-SF by both youth and caregivers was significantly associated with higher HbA1c, more diabetes-related stress, and more psychosocial concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

The DFCS-SF developed in the present study shows psychometric integrity in a diverse population of youth and can be utilized by providers to rapidly assess and potentially implement interventions to reduce diabetes family conflict, a psychosocial concern which is associated with elevated HbA1c, non-optimal adherence, diabetes-related stress, and psychological distress.

Assessing fatigue in multiple sclerosis: Psychometric properties of the five-item Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS-5)

Fatigue in multiple sclerosis is a key symptom associated with work-related problems and poor quality of life outcomes. The five-item Modified Fatigue Impact Scale is a brief self-assessment tool for measuring the impact of fatigue on cognitive, physical and psychosocial function. A non-interventional, cross-sectional study was conducted to assess dimensionality and item characteristics of the five-item Modified Fatigue Impact Scale in multiple sclerosis. A total of 302 subjects were studied. Mokken analysis found the five-item Modified Fatigue Impact Scale is a strong one-dimensional scale (overall scalability index H = 0.67) with high reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.90). The confirmatory factor analysis model confirmed the one-dimensional structure (comparative fit index = 1.0, root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.035). Samejima’s model fitted well as an unconstrained model with different item difficulties. The five-item Modified Fatigue Impact Scale shows appropriate psychometric characteristics and may constitute a valuable and easy-to-implement addition to measure the impact of fatigue in clinical practice.

An evidence-based strategy to achieve equivalency and interoperability for social-behavioral determinants of health assessment, storage, exchange, and use

The interoperable exchange of social-behavioral determinants of health data is challenging due to complex factors including multiple recommendations, multiple tools with varying domains, scoring, and cutpoints, and lack of terminology code sets for storing assessments and findings. This article describes a strategy that permits scoring by social-behavioral determinants of health domain to create interoperability and equivalency across tools, settings, and populations. The three-tier scoring strategy converts social-behavioral determinants of health data to (1) be used immediately at point of care by identifying social needs or social risk factors, (2) be consumed within analytics and algorithms and for secondary analysis, and (3) produce total scores that reflect social determinant burden and behavioral determinant burden across populations and settings within a healthcare system. The strategy supports the six uses recommended by the National Academy of Medicine, provides flexibility in choice of social-behavioral determinants of health tool, and leverages the power of social-behavioral determinants of health data in healthcare delivery.

Cross-cultural equivalence in translation of the oral health impact profile: how to interpret the final score?

The oral health impact profile (OHIP) is one of the most widely known oral health-related quality of life instruments. In Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, MacEntee and Brondani report the results of a systematic review to identify acceptable methods for translating psychometric instruments for cross-cultural equivalence of the OHIP scale. But in no study has unidimensionality, one aspect of the validity of the internal structure of the scale, been verified, whereas it is a major psychometric step. In the absence of the study of unidimensionality, it is difficult to interpret the final score. The methodology of transcultural validation of the OHIP could be improved, and the study of the unidimensionality is a psychometrically necessary step for the interpretation of the finale score.

Cross-cultural equivalence in translations of the oral health impact profile

The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) has been translated for comparisons across cultural boundaries. This report on a systematic search of literature published between 1994 and 2014 aims to identify an acceptable method of translating psychometric instruments for cross-cultural equivalence, and how they were used to translate the OHIP. An electronic search used the keywords 'cultural adaptation', 'validation', 'Oral Health Impact Profile' and 'OHIP' in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases supplemented by reference links and grey literature. It included papers on methods of cross-cultural translation and translations of the OHIP for dentulous adults and adolescents, and excluded papers without translational details or limited to specific disorders. The search identified eight steps to cross-cultural equivalence, and 36 (plus three supplemental) translations of the OHIP. The steps involve assessment of (i) forward/backward translation by committee, (ii) constructs, (iii) item interpretations, (iv) interval scales, (v) convergent validity, (vi) discriminant validity, (vii) responsiveness to clinical change and (viii) pilot tests. Most (>60%) of the translations involved forward/backward translation by committee, item interpretations, interval scales, convergence, discrimination and pilot tests, but fewer assessed the underlying theory (47%) or responsiveness to clinical change (28%). An acceptable method for translating quality of life-related psychometric instruments for cross-cultural equivalence has eight procedural steps, and most of the 36 OHIP translations involved at least five of the steps. Only translations to Saudi Arabian Arabic, Chinese Mandarin, German and Japanese used all eight steps to claim cultural equivalence with the original OHIP.

Societal preferences for distributive justice in the allocation of health care resources: a latent class discrete choice experiment

Economic theory suggests that resources should be allocated in a way that produces the greatest outputs, on the grounds that maximizing output allows for a redistribution that could benefit everyone. In health care, this is known as QALY (quality-adjusted life-year) maximization. This justification for QALY maximization may not hold, though, as it is difficult to reallocate health. Therefore, the allocation of health care should be seen as a matter of distributive justice as well as efficiency. A discrete choice experiment was undertaken to test consistency with the principles of QALY maximization and to quantify the willingness to trade life-year gains for distributive justice. An empirical ethics process was used to identify attributes that appeared relevant and ethically justified: patient age, severity (decomposed into initial quality and life expectancy), final health state, duration of benefit, and distributional concerns. Only 3% of respondents maximized QALYs with every choice, but scenarios with larger aggregate QALY gains were chosen more often and a majority of respondents maximized QALYs in a majority of their choices. However, respondents also appeared willing to prioritize smaller gains to preferred groups over larger gains to less preferred groups. Marginal analyses found a statistically significant preference for younger patients and a wider distribution of gains, as well as an aversion to patients with the shortest life expectancy or a poor final health state. These results support the existence of an equity-efficiency tradeoff and suggest that well-being could be enhanced by giving priority to programs that best satisfy societal preferences. Societal preferences could be incorporated through the use of explicit equity weights, although more research is required before such weights can be used in priority setting.

Psychometric properties of a Swedish version of the Consequences of Screening--Breast Cancer questionnaire

AIM

To evaluate the psychometric properties of a questionnaire addressing psychosocial consequences of false-positive mammographic screening.

BACKGROUND

The Consequences of Screening--Breast Cancer and Lung Cancer questionnaires target psychosocial consequences of false-positive cancer screening. The Consequences of Screening--Breast Cancer questionnaire and ten items not considered lung cancer specific from the Lung Cancer questionnaire have been adapted for use in mammographic screening in Sweden, but remain psychometrically untested.

DESIGN

Instrument development paper with psychometric cross-sectional and test-retest design.

METHODS

Twelve scales of a Swedish questionnaire version were tested by the Rasch model and traditional psychometric methods. Women with false-positive (Group I, n = 640) and negative (Group II, n = 802) screening mammography responded to the study questionnaire and the Nottingham Health Profile during 2009-2011.

RESULTS

Iterative analyses resulted in nine scales demonstrating Rasch model fit, but all scales exhibited poor targeting with relatively large floor effects. Corrected item-total correlations exceeded the recommended criterion. Score differences between Groups I and II and correlations with Nottingham Health Profile sections followed an expected pattern. Cronbach's α and test-retest reliability was acceptable for group-level assessments for ten and seven scales, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Five scales (Sense of dejection, Anxiety, Behavioural, Sleep and Existential values) of the Swedish questionnaire version demonstrated the best psychometric properties. Other scales should be used more cautiously. Although filling an important gap, causes of concern were identified across scales. The questionnaire should therefore be considered for group-level assessments rather than for measurement of individual degrees of psychosocial consequences.