Search

Background and Aims: A comprehensive standardized evaluation tool was needed to assess community awareness and preparedness when the pandemic hit the United States. This study aimed to develop and validate a new Coronavirus Awareness and Preparedness Scale (CAPS) through psychometric testing. Methods: This study unfolded in two phases. Phase 1 (conducted in March and April 2020) focused on the development of the scale. Phase 2 (conducted in June and July 2020) measured the reliability and validity of the scale. Psychometric testing, including exploratory factor analysis and reliability testing, was performed with a convenience sample of 1237 faculty, staff, and students at a southern university in the United States. Results: The final CAPS model consists of four factors with 26 items: threat (seven items), confidence (11 items), individual precautions (three items), and public precautions (five items). The scale demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.75). Strong and statistically significant item correlations were observed within the subscales through item analysis. Conclusion: The CAPS is a reliable and valid comprehensive evaluation instrument designed to gauge community awareness and preparedness during the early stages of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Its adaptability makes it suitable for measuring readiness and preparedness concerning any novel airborne disease or future airborne pandemic within a community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST) was developed to examine the level of partner (e.g., patients, caregivers, advocates, clinicians, community members) engagement in research studies. The REST is aligned with eight engagement principles based on the literature and consensus reached through a five round Delphi process. Each of the engagement principles has three-five corresponding items that are assessed on two Likert type scales quantity (how often: never, rarely, sometimes, often, always, not applicable) and quality (how well: poor, fair, good, very good, excellent, not applicable). We conducted a comprehensive validation of the REST. Despite the importance of partner engagement in research, currently no gold standard measure exists. Methods: Multiple strategies were employed to validate the REST. Here, we examine the internal consistency of items for each of the eight engagement principles. In addition, we examine the convergent validity of the comprehensive (32-item) REST with other measures (e.g., medical mistrust, Community Engagement in Research Index, Partnership Self-Assessment Tool, Wilder collaboration inventory, Partnership Assessment In community-based Research). We propose two scoring approaches for the REST; one aligned with the engagement principles and the other aligned with levels of community engagement: (1) outreach and education, (2) consultation, (3) cooperation, (4) collaboration, and (5) partnership. Results: The REST has strong internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.75) for each of the eight engagement principals measured on both scales (quality and quantity). The REST had negligible (e.g., medical mistrust, community engagement in research index), low (e.g., Partnership Assessment In community-based Research, Partnership Self-Assessment Tool- benefits scale), and moderate (e.g., Wilder collaboration inventory, Partnership Self-Assessment Tool- synergy scale) statistically significant correlations with other measures based on the Spearman rank correlation coefficient. These results suggest the REST is measuring something similar and correlated to the existing measures, but it captures a different construct (perceived research engagement). Conclusions: The REST is a valid and reliable tool to assess research engagement of community health stakeholders in the research process. Valid tools to assess research engagement are necessary to examine the impact of engagement on the scientific process and scientific discovery and move the field of stakeholder engagement from best practices and lessons learned to evidence-based approaches based on empirical data. Plain English summary: Researchers often conduct studies with partners (e.g., patients, caregivers, advocates, clinicians, community members) who also have an interest in the research topic. Depending on the research study the level of partner engagement in the research process may be high or low. Partners may be involved from the beginning including determining what topic to study and what questions the study should examine. They may suggest who should be included in the study, the geographic area of focus, and the outcome measures to be examined. In addition, they may help recruit study participants, interpret study results, and plan for how to share the results with those that need to know. No standard way exists to find out how involved a partner has been in a study from the partner's perspective. Here we develop and validate survey questions to measure the level of partner engagement in research studies. We looked at existing survey questions used to measure similar topics to make sure that a person who takes the survey gets consistent scores. We tested the survey with community health stakeholders (e.g., patients, caregivers, advocates, clinicians, community members) who are research partners for studies at universities across the United States. Over 2 years, the partners took different versions of the survey online four times. We used the data we collected from each survey to revise the questions and make sure that it measures partner involvement accurately and reliably. The Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST) has 32 questions to examine eight engagement principles on two scales: quantity (how much) and quality (how well). The REST is a valid and reliable tool to examine partner engagement in research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scale for hallux metatarsophalangeal (MTP) and interphalangeal (IP) joints is used throughout the world for the clinical assessment of patients with hallux valgus, and it has 3 subscales: pain, function, and alignment. The objective of this prospective, observational study was to perform translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of this scale for Colombian Spanish. The Foot Function Index and Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires were also used in the validation process. Patients who were 18 years or older, resided in the city of Bogota, were able to read and write in Spanish, and were within 4 years of corrective surgery for hallux valgus were included. A total of 79 patients were included in the study, 25 of whom were involved in the translation process and all of whom were involved in the validation process. Construct validity was demonstrated by significant positive Spearman's correlations between the AOFAS pain subscale and the AOFAS function subscale (r s  = 0.483), total AOFAS scale (r s  = 0.795), and SF-36 physical summary subscale (r s  = 0.364); and between the AOFAS function subscale and the total AOFAS scale (r s  = 0.894) and SF-36 physical summary subscale (r s  = 0.310). The test-retest process for reliability yielded intraclass correlation coefficients between the AOFAS pain, function, and alignment subscales that were all 0.70 or higher. The AOFAS scale for hallux MTP and IP joints was successfully translated and adapted into Colombian Spanish, and this version demonstrated construct validity and reliability, rendering it suitable for clinical use in Colombian patients with hallux valgus., (Copyright © 2022 the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Developmental Test of Visual Perception – Third Edition (DTVP-3) is a recently published revision of a visual perceptual test from the United States, frequently used by occupational therapists. It is important that tests have adequate documented reliability and validity and are evaluated in cross-cultural contexts. The purpose of the study was to assess the reliability and validity of the DTVP-3 when completed by a group of Australian participants. Thirty-nine typically developing children 6–8 years of age completed the DTVP-3 and the Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration – 6th edition (VMI-6). The internal consistency of the DVTP-3 was assessed using Cronbach alpha coefficients and the DTVP-3's convergent validity was examined by correlating it with the VMI-6 and its two supplementary tests. The five DTVP-3 subscales' Cronbach alpha coefficients ranged from.60 to.80 while its three composite indexes had coefficients all at the.80 level. The VMI-6 was significantly correlated with the DTVP-3 Figure Ground and Visual Closure subscales and the Motor-Reduced Visual Perception Index (MRVPI). The VMI-6 Visual Perception Supplementary Test was significantly correlated with the DTVP-3 Figure Ground, Visual Closure, Form Constancy, MRVPI, and General Visual Perception Index. The DTVP-3 exhibited acceptable levels of internal consistency and moderate levels of convergent validity with the VMI-6 when completed by a group of Australian children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the effect of scoring method, education, and language usage on internal consistency of the Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Trained bilingual staff administered the MMSE in participants' homes as part of the San Antonio Longitudinal Study of Aging home-based assessment battery. Subjects included 833 community-dwelling Mexican-American (MA) and European-American (EA) elders, aged 65 and older, residing in three socioculturally distinct neighborhoods in San Antonio, Texas. Three methods of scoring the MMSE were examined: serial sevens only, spelling only, and serial sevens or spelling, whichever was higher. Mean MMSE scores±standard deviation ranged from 27.7±2.4 to 28.5±1.9 for EAs, from 25.6±3.2 to 27.2±2.9 for MAs interviewed in English, and from 22.5±4.5 to 25.5±3.5 for MAs interviewed in Spanish, depending on scoring method. Across the three ethnic-language subgroups, the lowest mean scores, largest coefficients of variation, and highest alpha coefficients were observed using serial sevens only. Stratification by educational level showed that alpha coefficients for all three scoring methods were consistently lower in high school graduates than in less-educated groups. Serial sevens only was the only scoring method that yielded acceptably high alpha coefficients across all ethnic, language, and education subgroups. Thus, clinicians should use the serial sevens–only method when administering the MMSE and be alert to the increased potential for false-negatives in more highly educated EA and MA elders, particularly in EAs and MAs proficient in English. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unlabelled: Feasibility, reliability, and discriminative validity of the cross-culturally adapted Dutch version of the originally US child health questionnaire-child form (CHQ-CF87), an 87-item generic pediatric health-related quality of life instrument, were assessed. The success criterion in this first evaluation was the equivalence of psychometric properties of the adapted and the original CHQ. A total of 466 schoolchildren (9-17 years) were invited to complete the questionnaire in the classroom. Test-retest reliability was measured after 14 days in a subgroup (n = 71). Response was 96%. Four scales had ceiling effects (>50%), as was reported in an Australian study. Cronbach alpha-values were adequate (>0.70), except for 'physical functioning' (0.56). Test-retest correlations, not previously reported, were not statistically significant for two CHQ-scales, whereas average retest scores indicated better health for five scales (p < 0.01). The CHQ scales discriminated significantly (p < 0.01) between children without (n = 281) and children with two or more self-reported chronic diseases (n = 59). This is in correspondence with US and Australian reports.Conclusions: The current data support application of the Dutch CHQ-CF in predominantly healthy populations, e.g. in school settings. Given the limitations of this study and some less favorable results (score distributions, internal consistency, test-retest reliability), further evaluation of the CHQ-CF is recommended, preferably by analyses of item performance and scale validity in international data sets that include varied clinical subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2018, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended prostate cancer screening for men aged 55 to 69 years who express a preference for being screened after being informed about and understanding prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test benefits and risks. USPSTF recommended against screening men aged ≥70 years. We aim to generate county-level prevalence estimates, masked by national and state estimates, to identify counties with high PSA screening prevalence., Methods: We fitted multilevel logistic regression mixed models for 4 age groups (≥40, 40 to 54, 55 to 69, ≥70 years), using data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) (n = 116,654) and other sources. We evaluated consistency between our model-based state and BRFSS direct state estimates with Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients., Results: PSA screening prevalence increased with increasing age groups: 7.7% for men aged 40 to 54 years, 27.2% for men aged 55 to 69 years, and 33.7% among men age ≥70 years, and was largely clustered in the South and Appalachia. Many county estimates among men aged ≥70 years exceeded 40%, especially in the South. Correlation coefficients were 0.94 for men aged ≥40, and ≥0.85 for men aged 40 to 54 years, 55 to 69 years, and ≥70 years., Conclusions: PSA screening was highest among men ≥70 years, for whom it is not recommended, and in the South among all age groups. Screening varied substantially within states., Impact: In 2018, on average, more than 1 in 4 men aged 55 to 69 years and 1 in 3 men aged ≥70 years underwent PSA screening in the prior year, suggesting potential overuse among some men., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest., (© Copyright 2021 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Objective: Symptom free days are a widely used patient-reported outcome (PRO) in asthma clinical trials. We assessed the internal consistency of one instrument for this PRO, the Symptom Free Days Questionnaire (SFDQ), in a population of Black adults with asthma enrolled in the Blacks and Exacerbations on Long-acting beta agonists and Tiotropium (BELT) trial. Methods: We assessed responses to the SFDQ collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months as part of the BELT trial. The internal consistency of responses, specifically number of patient-reported days with symptoms in 14 days were compared to the number of patient-reported days with no symptoms in the same 14 days. Lin concordance correlation coefficients (Lin ccc) were calculated over time to assess "learning" and by age, sex, geographic location, and annual family income. Results: The internal consistency of the responses of the 1070 enrolled patients was consistently low over the 12 months of the study; varying from 43.8% at baseline to 52.1% at 12 months. This corresponded to Lin cccs of 0.33-0.32 over the study period. Internal consistency and the Lin ccc did not vary by age group, sex, geographic location or percent poverty. Concordance was slightly but not significantly higher at all time points in those with family annual income of ≥$50,000 compared to those with lower annual incomes. Conclusions: The SFDQ did not work well in the BELT population of Black adults with asthma. Further validation is required before the SFDQ is used in other large clinical trials with any population.