Search

Validity is not an inherent property of a measurement scale and so evidence for validity relating to its use for particular purposes, with defined populations and in specified contexts must be accumulated. We have published the development of a web-based, generic health-related quality of life instrument (VetMetrica™) to measure the affective impact of chronic disease in cats and provided evidence for its validity in a mixed population of cats, some of which, according to veterinary judgement, were healthy and others of which were suffering from chronic conditions likely to affect their quality of life, often with multiple co-morbidities present. The first aim of the current study was to demonstrate the construct validity of the VetMetrica™ generic instrument when used with cats suffering from osteoarthritis, by testing the hypothesis that the health-related quality of life profile of cats with different severities of osteoarthritis would differ and by demonstrating convergent validity between the health-related quality of life profile scores and independently quantified vet-assessed pain and quality of life impact scores. The latter involved simple correlation analysis and investigation of the relationship between health-related quality of life domain scores and vet-assessed scores, when adjusted for other potential explanatory variables including number of comorbidities and age. Responsiveness—the ability to detect clinically relevant change—is an essential quality for an evaluative instrument and it also provides evidence for “longitudinal validity”. Therefore, a second aim of this study was to demonstrate that changes in health-related quality of life domain scores concurred with the clinician's impression of change over time in the health status of cats with osteoarthritis, thus providing evidence for the instrument's responsiveness. Previously, we have reported disagreement between owner and vet impression as to health status in cats in general, but not in relation to any specific disease. Accordingly, the third study aim was to investigate the extent of agreement or disagreement between owner impression of the impact of osteoarthritis on their cats' quality of life and vet impression of such impact. Fifty one percentage of cat owners believed their cats to be perfectly healthy despite a clinician diagnosis of osteoarthritis

Objective: Performance validity test (PVT) research studies commonly utilize a known-groups design, but the criterion grouping approaches within the design vary greatly from one study to another. At the present time, it is unclear as to what degree different criterion grouping approaches might impact PVT classification accuracy statistics. Method: To analyze this, the authors used three different criterion grouping approaches to examine how classification accuracy statistics of a PVT (Word Choice Test; WCT) would differ. The three criterion grouping approaches included: (1) failure of 2+ PVTs versus failure of 0 PVTs, (2) failure of 2+ PVTs versus failure of 0–1 PVT, and (3) failure of a stand-alone PVT versus passing of a stand-alone PVT (Test of Memory Malingering). Results: When setting specificity at ≥.90, WCT cutoff scores ranged from 41 to 44 and associated sensitivity values ranged from.64 to.88, depending on the criterion grouping approach that was utilized. Conclusions: When using a stand-alone PVT to define criterion group status, classification accuracy rates of the WCT were higher than expected, likely due to strong correlations between the reference PVT and the WCT. This held true even when considering evidence that this grouping approach results in higher rates of criterion group misclassification. Conversely, when using criterion grouping approaches that utilized failure of 2+ PVTs, accuracy rates were more consistent with expectations. These findings demonstrate that criterion grouping approaches can impact PVT classification accuracy rates and resultant cutoff scores. Strengths, weaknesses, and practical implications of each of the criterion grouping approaches are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A known-groups design was used to determine the classification accuracy of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III (WAIS-III) variables in detecting malingered neurocognitive dysfunction (MND) in traumatic brain injury (TBI). TBI patients were classified into the following groups: (a) mild TBI not-MND (n = 26), (b) mild TBI MND (n = 31), and (c) moderate/severe (M/S) TBI not-MND (n = 26). A sample of 80 general clinical patients was used for comparison. Verbal IQ, Verbal Comprehension Index, and Working Memory Index detected approximately 25% of malingerers with a false positive (FP) error rate of approximately 5% in the mild TBI group. Comparable FP rates were obtained in M/S TBI. FP rates for Performance IQ, Perceptual Organization Index, and Processing Speed Index were acceptable in mild TBI but too high in M/S TBI. Previously studied specialized indicators (Vocabulary minus Digit Span and the Mittenberg formula) failed to differentiate malingerers from nonmalingerers. The clinical application of these findings is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]