Criterion-validity-based assessment of four scale constructs

Author:

Foldspang Anders1,Montgomery Edith2

Affiliation:

1. Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims (RCT), Copenhagen, , Department of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark

2. Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims (RCT), Copenhagen

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to discuss, in general, selected crucial aspects of the appropriate methodology for the development and validation of scales indicating health status, and to illustrate this empirically by within-material comparison of the accuracy of four different scale constructs based on identical raw data. Methods: The empirical example was based on information from the parents of 99 refugee children, aged 3-15 years, from the Middle East, who participated in a structured interview on their children's mental health. Following this, they were exposed to a blinded semi-structured psychological interview. Four anxiety scales were constructed based on answers to 12 anxiety symptom questions in the structured interview: Scale 1, by cumulation of original item scores, each ranging from 0 to 3; Scale 2, by counting the number of symptoms being present; Scale 3, by counting the number of frequent or intense anxiety symptoms; Scale 4, by estimation of the multivariate probability of the child being anxious, as assessed by the psychological interview. The scales were compared for their accuracy in the identification of children assessed as anxious by psychological interview. Results: The four scales correlated mutually, and each of them was significantly associated with anxiety, as assessed by psychological interview. The weighted scale, however, performed significantly better than the unweighted scales for sensitivity but not for specificity. In the present data set the overall amount of misclassification was, however, significantly less than in the unweighted scales. Conclusion: As expected from theory, the weighted scale was found to be superior to the unweighted scales, in identifying the anxious children of the empirical example. In the presence of a blinded criterion measurement, empirical regression-based weighting of scale items thus constitutes an accessible and valid alternative to traditional methods of health and social scaling.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Medicine

Reference18 articles.

1. Rating Scales for Psychopathology, Health Status and Quality of Life

2. Rust J., Golombok S. Modern psychometrics: the science of psychological assessment London: Routledge, 1989 . 1.

Cited by 9 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3