A literature review of the variance in interval length between administrations for assessment of test retest reliability and equivalence of pro measures

Quadri, Nuz; Wild, Derk Sven Gard; Skerritt, Barbara; Muehlhausen, Willie; O’Donohoe, Paul

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2013.03.230

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this effect was counteracted by the crossover study design, and patients were provided with reading material as a ‘distraction’. Nevertheless, there is no consensus on the ideal time interval between PRO administrations when carrying out test–retest validation: intervals have ranged from 1 min to 7 years . Other studies have also used 30 min as a washout period .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the paper‐based and electronic versions of the Dermatology Life Quality Index: evidence of equivalence

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What's already known about this topic? The use of patient reported outcome measures (PROs) in electronic format has been increasing.  Electronic formats are usually not validated or compared to their original paper-based formats, but are assumed without evidence to be comparable.  The benefits of using electronic PROs include portability, real-time monitoring of patients' quality of life and improved data capture. What does this study add? There is equivalence between completing the DLQI on paper and in an electronic format.  Patients prefer the electronic format to the paper version: the electronic format takes slightly longer to complete.  This equivalence testing of the electronic format of the DLQI with the paper version will reassure and encourage such use in clinical and research settings. ABSTRACT BackgroundThe use of patient-reported outcome measures in electronic format has been increasing. However, these formats are usually not validated or compared to the original paper-based formats, so there is no evidence that they are completed in the same way.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the paper‐based and electronic versions of the Dermatology Life Quality Index: evidence of equivalence

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, we did not evaluate the test-retest reliability of the PANAS. Literature has shown that there is a wide variety of administration intervals used in test-retest reliability [82]. However, the length of the test-retest interval can affect patient's responses and should be sufficiently long to ensure that patients do not remember their previous answer, though sufficiently short to ensure that clinical change has not occurred over time [83].…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): psychometric properties of the online Spanish version in a clinical sample with emotional disorders

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is the most widely and frequently used scale to assess positive and negative affect. The PANAS has been validated in several languages, and it has shown excellent psychometric properties in the general population and some clinical samples, such as forensic samples, substance users, and adult women with fibromyalgia. Nevertheless, the psychometric properties of the scale have not yet been examined in clinical samples with anxiety, depressive, and adjustment disorders. In addition, the proliferation of Internet-based treatments has led to the development of a wide range of assessments conducted online with digital versions of pen and paper self-report questionnaires. However, no validations have been carried out to analyze the psychometric properties of the online version of the PANAS. The present study investigates the psychometric properties of the online Spanish version of the PANAS in a clinical sample of individuals with emotional disorders. Methods: The sample was composed of 595 Spanish adult volunteers with a diagnosis of depressive disorder (n = 237), anxiety disorder (n = 284), or adjustment disorder (n = 74). Factor structure, construct validity, internal consistency, and sensitivity to change were analyzed. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis yielded a latent structure of two independent factors, consistent with previous validations of the instrument. The analyses showed adequate convergent and discriminant validity, good internal consistency as well as sensitivity to change. Conclusions: Overall, the results obtained in this study show that the online version of the PANAS has adequate psychometric properties for the assessment of positive and negative affect in a Spanish clinical population.

show abstract

“…There is a wide variety of administration intervals used in test–retest and equivalence studies seen within the literature. A systematic review on test–retest reliability showed that one percent of the studies had an interval of one hour or less, 18% had an interval of one day to one week, 25% had an interval of one week to two weeks, 21% had an interval of two weeks to one month, nine% had an interval of one to two months, 13% had an interval of two months or over and 13% reported a varied interval [ 46 ]. Considerations around the appropriate administration interval should be based on, among other things, an assessment of the stability of the condition involved and the complexity of the study sample [ 46 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instrument to Identify Food Neophobia in Brazilian Children by Their Caregivers

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to develop a specific instrument to evaluate food neophobia focused on Brazilian children and to perform the content validation and internal semantic consistency and reproducibility evaluation of the instrument. Three steps were necessary to conduct the study: (i) development of the instrument, (ii) internal validation (content validation and semantic evaluation) of the food neophobia instrument using 22 experts in the first round and 20 of them in the second round, (iii) evaluation of the internal consistency and reproducibility of the instrument with the children’s caregivers, using the test–retest (where the same caregiver—n = 22—answered twice, with 24 h interval) and comparing responses between two caregivers (n = 44) of the same children (n = 22). We developed an instrument in Brazilian–Portuguese to evaluate children’s food neophobia based on the caregivers’ perceptions with 25 items divided into three domains (neophobia in general, neophobia for fruits and neophobia for vegetables). Our results indicated that the instrument has excellent internal consistency (>0.9) and reproducibility (>0.9) when answered by the caregiver who knows the child’s eating habits, indicating reliability to be applied in Brazil. In addition, when the two caregivers answered the instrument, we found a good reproducibility (>0.6), confirming the possibility to be answered by one of the caregivers. Further studies are necessary to complete external validation with a representative sample of the target group in Brazil, showing nationwide the profile of the population. The potential of a neophobia study would contribute to the implementation of effective strategies and guidelines to support parents and health professionals, especially those involved in health and nutrition, to identify traces of food neophobia or neophobic behavior. By accurately measuring food neophobia in children, families can prevent nutritional deficiencies throughout adolescence and adulthood, improving eating habits. Children usually have neophobias similar to the ones presented by their parents—and when early detected, these neophobias can be addressed.

show abstract

A literature review of the variance in interval length between administrations for assessment of test retest reliability and equivalence of pro measures

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Comparison of the paper‐based and electronic versions of the Dermatology Life Quality Index: evidence of equivalence

Comparison of the paper‐based and electronic versions of the Dermatology Life Quality Index: evidence of equivalence

Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): psychometric properties of the online Spanish version in a clinical sample with emotional disorders

Instrument to Identify Food Neophobia in Brazilian Children by Their Caregivers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About