220 likes | 550 Views
Lecture 6: Reliability and validity of scales (cont). 1. In relation to scales, define the following terms: - Content validity - Criterion validity (concurrent and predictive) - Construct validity (discriminant and convergent) - Responsiveness 2. Use of proxy respondents. Validity.
E N D
Lecture 6: Reliability and validity of scales (cont) 1. In relation to scales, define the following terms: - Content validity - Criterion validity (concurrent and predictive) - Construct validity (discriminant and convergent) - Responsiveness 2. Use of proxy respondents
Validity • Depends on purpose: • screening: discrimination • outcome of treatment: responsiveness, sensitivity to change • prognosis: predictive validity
Content and face validity • Judgment of “experts” and/or members of target population • Does measure adequately sample domain being measured? • Does it appear to measure what it is intended to measure? (eyeball test)
Criterion validity • Criterion (“gold” standard) • Concurrent criterion validity • e.g., screening test vs diagnostic test • Predictive criterion validity • e.g., cancer staging test vs 5-year survival
Construct validity • Is the theoretical construct underlying the measure valid? • Development and testing of hypotheses • Requires multiple data sources and investigations: • Convergent validity: measure is correlated with other measures of similar constructs • discriminant validity: measure is not correlated with measures of different constructs
Responsiveness of measures • Ability to detect clinically important change over time or differences between treatments • Requirement of evaluative measures • Two approaches: • external responsiveness (validation against change in external criterion) • internal responsiveness: compute effect size of ratio of change score to measure of variability (different formulae)
Validity of Delirium Index (DI) • Convergent validity • DI will be correlated with measures of current health/function: • Current ADL disability (Barthel Index) • Current severity of illness (clinical judgment and physiological severity score from APACHE)
Validity of Delirium Index (DI) • Discriminant validity: • DI will be weakly correlated with measures of previous health/function: • premorbid level of ADL disability • severity of dementia • comorbidity (prior)
Validity of DI (cont) • DI score will predict probability of one-year survival • DI score will be sensitive to: • changes in medication exposures • changes in environmental factors
Spearman correlation coefficients between Delirium Index and 3 baseline measures of current status
Spearman correlation coefficients between Delirium Index and 3 baseline measures of prior status
Delirium severity and survival • Proportional hazards regression of delirium severity in delirium cohort • Mean of 1st 2 DI scores • Results • significant interaction: DI predicted survival in patients with delirium alone, not in those with dementia
Effects of medications and environmental factors • Repeated in-hospital measures of DI, medications (medical record), and environmental factors (using checklist) • Repeated measurements analysis performed to investigate associations of changes in risk factors with change in DI score.
Environmental risk factors for delirium Source: McCusker et al, JAGS 2001, 49:1327-34
Medications and DI • Medication changes (increase in # medications, use of anticholinergic medications) were associated with increase in DI score.
Responsiveness of DI • Internal responsiveness: ability to capture real change over time • effect size (change in mean DI/SD at baseline) • standardized response mean (change in mean DI/SD of change) • External responsiveness: are changes in the DI correlated with other measures of change?
Internal responsiveness of the Delirium Index (DI) at 8 weeks
Validity of DI: Conclusions • In patients with delirium +/- dementia: • Correlated with measures of current function • Responsive to change over time • Responsive to changes in environmental factors and medications • In patients with delirium alone: • Predicts survival
Example: Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) • Disease-specific HRQoL measure • 30 items covering 4 domains • bowel symptoms • systemic symptoms • emotional function • social function • How to validate?
Validation of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire • Questionnaires administered to 42 patients with inflammatory bowel disease on 2 occasions, 1 month apart: • IBDQ • Global ratings of function • Global ratings of change by physician and a relative • Disease Activity Index • Emotional function scale from generic HRQoL instrument
Validation of IBDQ: predictions and results • Correlation of 0.5 or more between patients’s global rating of change and IBDQ subscale on bowel symptoms (result: 0.42) • Correlation of 0.3 or more between change in Disease Activity Index and IBDQ subscale on bowel symptoms (result: 0.33) • Correlation of 0.3 or more between change in Disease Activity Index and IBDQ subscale on systemic symptoms (result: 0.04) • Correlation of 0.5 or more between change in generic measure of emotional function and IBDQ subscale on emotional function (result: 0.76)