Clinical assessment of non-suicidal self-injury: A systematic review of instruments

There has been an increase in the number of assessment instruments for non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI). However, previous reviews are inconsistent and do not provide a comprehensive psychometric assessment of the instruments. This study aimed to systematically assess and compare the psychometric properties of clinically relevant instruments to measure NSSI in any population. Through a systematic review guided by COSMIN and PRISMA, two searches were conducted in English and Spanish in February 2020 in 13 databases including grey literature. Of the 7,813 initial records, 152 validations were extracted. From these, 83 instruments (22 versions or adaptations) were excluded for not measuring NSSI, having no potential clinical utility or not including psychometric properties. Finally, 26 (22 versions, 35 adaptations and 19 creations) instruments measuring NSSI were included. Predominantly, the studies were North American self-reports in English for community adolescents, adaptations or versions emanating from a small number of instruments. Twenty-six indicators were categorized to assess NSSI. The most frequent instruments are structured interviews, and their indicators were related to NSSI function and topography. Evidence of validity and reliability was positive but limited. Despite the high number of instruments and diversity of evaluations, we found no instrument with sufficient evidence for clinical assessment. Findings broadly overview NSSI assessment instruments' current use and future improvement in clinical and research settings.     

进食障碍患者家庭顺应量表的汉化及信效度检验

目的 汉化进食障碍患者家庭顺应量表，并检验其信效度。方法 根据Brislin翻译模式将量表翻译成中文，通过专家函询和预调查对量表进行文化调适和修订。将量表应用于300例进食障碍患者照顾者检验信效度。结果 中文版进食障碍患者家庭顺应量表的量表水平内容效度指数为0.918。探索性因子分析结果显示5个因子可解释总变异量的49.862%。量表的各维度得分与量表总分呈中高度相关，各维度得分之间呈中低度相关或不相关。量表总Cronbach′s α为0.877，重测信度为0.883。结论 中文版进食障碍患者家庭顺应量表具有较好的信效度，可用于测量进食障碍患者的家庭顺应情况。     

加拿大问题赌博指数中文版的效度和信度

目的:评估加拿大问题赌博指数中文版(CPGI-C)的效度和信度。方法:选取43例匿名戒赌会成员和202例正常成人为研究对象,将其随机分为两半,分别进行探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析;以赌博相关认知量表(GRCS-C)、Barratt冲动性人格问卷(BIS-11)、抑郁自评量表(SDS)、网络成瘾量表修订版(CIAS-R)和DSM-IV多重反应问卷(DSM-IV-MR)作为效标工具;以受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)评估量表区分问题赌博者的特异度与灵敏度。2周后有5例匿名戒赌会成员和31例正常成人完成重测。结果:CPGI-C的问题赌博指数(PGSI)分量表共9个条目,探索性因子分析得出1个主成分因子,可解释总方差的74.3%;验证性因子分析显示,单因子结构模型的拟合指标良好(χ~2=2.087,CFI=0.926,TLI=0.963,GFI=0.926,IFI=0.978,NFI=0.958, RMSEA=0.094,SRMR=0.032);CPGI总分与各效标量表的总分均呈正相关(r=0.48～0.82,均P<0.001);ROC曲线下面积为0.962,划界分为9.5。CPGI-C的...     

Smartphone-based inertial sensors technology – Validation of a new application to measure spatiotemporal gait metrics

BackgroundSmartphones are increasingly recognized as the future technology for clinical gait assessment.ResearchQuestion: To determine the concurrent validity of gait parameters obtained using the smartphone technology and application in a group of patients with musculoskeletal pathologies.MethodsPatients with knee, lower back, hip, or ankle pain were included in the study (n = 72). Spatiotemporal outcomes were derived from the walkway and the smartphone simultaneously. Pearson’s correlations and limits of agreement (LoA) determined the association between the two methods.ResultsCadence and gait cycle time showed excellent correlation and agreement between the smartphone and the walkway (cadence: r = 0.997, LoA=1.4%, gait cycle time: r = 0.996, LoA = 1.6%). Gait speed, double-limb support and left and right step length demonstrated strong correlations and moderate agreement between methods (gait speed: r = 0.914, LoA=15.4%, left step length: r = 0.842, LoA = 17.0%, right step length: r = 0.800, LoA=16.4%). The left and right measures of single-limb support and stance percent showed a consistent 4% bias across instruments, yielding moderate correlation and very good agreement between the smartphone and the walkway (r = 0.532, LoA = 9% and r = 0.460, LoA=9.8% for left and right single-limb support; r = 0.463, LoA = 5.1% and r = 0.533, LoA = 4.4% for left and right stance).Significance: The examined application appears to be a valid tool for gait analysis, providing clinically significant metrics for the assessment of patients with musculoskeletal pathologies. However, additional studies should examine the technology amongst patients with severe gait abnormalities.     

Validity of injury self-reports by novice runners: comparison with reports by sports medicine physicians

This study examined the criterion validity of self-reported running-related injuries (RRI) by novice runners. Fifty-eight participants (41 females; age 46 ± 11 yrs) of the “Start-to-Run” program provided self-reports on their RRIs using an online questionnaire. Subsequently, they attended injury consultations with sports medicine physicians who provided physician-reports (blinded for the self-reports) as a reference standard. Self-reports and physician-reports included information on injury location (i.e., hip/groin, upper leg, knee, lower leg, and ankle/foot) and injury type (i.e., muscle-tendon unit, joint, ligament, or bone). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values were 100% for all five injury locations. For injury type, sensitivity was low (66% for muscle-tendon unit, 50% for ligament, and 40% for bone) and lowest for joint injuries (17%). In conclusion, the validity of self-reported RRIs by novice runners is good for injury locations but not for injury types. In particular for joint injuries, the validity of novice runners’ self-reports is low.

Abbreviations: RRI: Running Related Injury; SMC: Sports Medicine Centre; MTU: Muscle Tendon Unit; PPV: Positive Predictive Value     

Validity and reliability of the Unified Classification System applied to periprosthetic femur fractures: a comparison with the Vancouver system

Abstract

Objective: The Unified Classification System (UCS) presents itself as an evolution of the Vancouver Classification (VCS) for the evaluation of periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur (PPF). The aim of our study was to highlight any loss of reproducibility or validity of the new classification system, compared to the previous one.

Material and methods: We tested the interobserver and intraobserver agreement using 40 PPF clinical cases. Each classifying subtype of the UCS and VCS was present in at least two cases. Six experienced hip surgeons (Senior Surgeon, SS) and 5 surgeons in training (Junior Surgeon, JS) classified the clinical cases, using VCS and UCS. The validity of both classifications was then tested with intraoperative surveys.

Results: The mean κ value for interobserver agreement for the VCS in the JS group was 0.65 and 0.81 for the SS group. The mean κ value for interobserver agreement for the UCS in the JS group was 0.63 and 0.65 for the SS group. The mean κ value for intraobserver agreement for the VCS in the JS group was 0.71 and 0.73 for the SS group. The mean κ value for intraobserver agreement for the UCS in the JS group was 0.72 and 0.7 for the SS group. Validity analysis showed a moderate agreement for the VCS and a good agreement for the UCS.

Conclusion: The UCS completes the Vancouver classification, expanding it. It is reliable, despite the increase in classification categories and number of parameters to evaluate, with a slightly higher validity.     

Differentiating poor validity from probable impairment on the medical symptom validity test: a cross-validation study

Aims: In neuropsychological evaluations, it is often difficult to ascertain whether poor performance on measures of validity is due to poor effort or malingering, or whether there is genuine cognitive impairment. Dunham and Denney created an algorithm to assess this question using the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). We assessed the ability of their algorithm to detect poor validity versus probable impairment, and concordance of failure on the MSVT with other freestanding tests of performance validity.

Methods: Two previously published datasets (n?=?153 and n?=?641, respectively) from outpatient neuropsychological evaluations were used to test Dunham and Denney’s algorithm, and to assess concordance of failure rates with the Test of Memory Malingering and the forced choice measure of the California Verbal Learning Test, two commonly used performance validity tests.

Results: In both datasets, none of the four cutoff scores for failure on the MSVT (70%, 75%, 80%, or 85%) identified a poor validity group with proportionally aligned failure rates on other freestanding measures of performance validity. Additionally, the protocols with probable impairment did not differ from those with poor validity on cognitive measures.

Conclusions: Despite what appeared to be a promising approach to evaluating failure on the easy MSVT subtests when clinical data are unavailable (as recommended in the advanced interpretation program, or advanced interpretation [AI], of the MSVT), the current findings indicate the AI remains the gold standard for doing so. Future research should build on this effort to address shortcomings in measures of effort in neuropsychological evaluations.     

Assessment of a conceptually informed measure of emotion dysregulation: Evidence of construct validity vis a vis impulsivity and internalizing symptoms in adolescents with ADHD

ObjectivesDespite advances in understanding associations among attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), emotion dysregulation (ED), and related outcomes, there is incongruity between ADHD‐relevant conceptualizations of ED and available measures of ED. To assess the psychometric properties of a parent‐report questionnaire of ED conceptualized as deficits in the ability to modulate the (a) speed/degree of emotion escalation; (b) expression intensity; and (c) speed/degree of de‐escalation.MethodsParticipants were 209 adolescents with ADHD (78% male; 13.5–17.8 years old [M = 15.2 SD = 0.91]). Questionnaire items were selected from parent‐report scales of ED and oppositional defiant disorder and subjected to exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and validity analyses.ResultsThe EFA revealed two factors, with speed/degree of escalation combined with intensity as factor one, and speed/degree of de‐escalation as factor two. Factor one scores were related to ADHD impulsivity symptoms but not to anxiety and depression symptoms and they remained predictors of impulsivity even in the presence of self‐report ED, evincing convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity. Factor two scores were related to anxiety and depression but not impulsivity, evincing convergent and discriminant validity.ConclusionThese results inform our understanding of ADHD‐relevant ED in adolescence and offer avenues for future research in measurement development, as well as for understanding ED and ADHD‐related impairment.