Preliminary analysis of the concurrent validity of the Spanish translation of the BEARS sleep screening tool for children

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (8) ◽  
pp. 513-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. F. Bastida-Pozuelo ◽  
M. M. Sánchez-Ortuño
Keyword(s):  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Preliminary Analysis ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Spanish Translation ◽  
Sleep Screening

scholarly journals Joint Assessment of Equilibrium and Neuromotor Function: A Validation Study in Patients with Fibromyalgia

Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1057
Author(s):  
Rafael Lomas-Vega ◽  
Daniel Rodríguez-Almagro ◽  
Ana Belén Peinado-Rubia ◽  
Noelia Zagalaz-Anula ◽  
Francisco Molina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Validation Study ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire ◽  
Head Movements ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Neuromotor Function ◽  
Joint Assessment

Objective: To develop and validate a tool for evaluating balance and neuromotor function in patients with fibromyalgia (FMS). Methods: Brainstorming, the nominal group technique, and pilot-testing were used to select a battery of 20 functional balance tests that were included in a screening tool. A total of 108 subjects (62 with fibromyalgia syndrome, 22 aged over 65 years, and 24 healthy subjects) participated in this validation study. Factor validity, internal consistency, the ability to discriminate between patients and healthy subjects, and concurrent validity with the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), and other tools for measuring balance, such as the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI), the Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC-16), the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), and posturographic parameters, were evaluated. Results: The factorial analysis extracted four factors that explained 70% of the variance. The Alpha Cronbach value was 0.928. Concurrent validity of the screening tool with respect to other tools was high, and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed an AUC value of 0.932 for discriminating between healthy and FMS subjects. Severe balance disorder related to head movements in FMS patients was found. Conclusion: The 20-item JAEN (Joint Assessment of Equilibrium and Neuro-motor Function) screening tool is a valid and reliable tool for assessing balance in patients with FMS.

scholarly journals Development and validation of a mHealth falls risk screening app (FallSA©) among Malaysian Community Dwelling Older Persons (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devinder Kaur Ajit Singh ◽  
Jing Wen Goh ◽  
Muhammad Iqbal Shaharudin ◽  
Suzana Shahar
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Fall Risk ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Older Persons ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Discriminative Ability ◽  
Validity Test ◽  
Falls Risk

BACKGROUND Recent falls prevention guidelines recommend early routine falls risk assessment among older persons. OBJECTIVE The purpose of current study was to develop a Falls Screening Mobile Application (FallSA©), determine its acceptance, concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, discriminative ability and predictive validity as a self-screening tool to identify falls risk among Malaysian older persons. METHODS FallSA© acceptance was tested among 15 participants (mean age: 65.93±7.42 years); its validity and reliability among 91 participants (mean age: 67.34±5.97); discriminative ability and predictive validity among 610 participants (mean age: 71.78±4.70). Acceptance of FallSA© was assessed using a questionnaire and it was validated against a comprehensive falls risk assessment tool, Physiological Profile Assessments (PPA). Participants used FallSA© to test their falls risk repeatedly twice between an hour. Its discriminative ability and predictive validity were determined by comparing participants fall risk scores between fallers and non-fallers and prospectively through a 6 months follow-up respectively RESULTS The findings of our study showed that FallSA© had a high acceptance level with 80% older persons agreeing on its suitability as a falls self-screening tool. Concurrent validity test demonstrated a significant moderate correlation (rs= 0.518, P<0.001) and agreement (K= 0.516, P<0.001) with acceptable sensitivity (80.4%) and specificity (71.1%). FallSA© also had good reliability (ICC: 0.948, CI: 0.921-0.966) and an internal consistency (α= 0.948, P<0.001). FallSA© score demonstrated a moderate to strong discriminative ability in classifying fallers and non-fallers. FallSA© had a predictive validity of falls with positive likelihood ratio of 2.27, pooled sensitivity of 82% and specificity of 64%, and AUC of 0.802. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that FallSA© is a valid and reliable fall risk self-screening tool. Further studies are required to empower and engage older persons or care givers in the use of FallSA© to self-screen for falls and thereafter to seek early prevention intervention. CLINICALTRIAL NA

scholarly journals Adapting the Auckland Sleep Screening Tool for pharmacy: pharmacists’ experience and feedback

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Gauld ◽  
Crystal Braganza ◽  
Bruce Arroll
Keyword(s):  
Screening Tool ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Community Pharmacists ◽  
Advisory Group ◽  
Usual Practice ◽  
Potential Barriers ◽  
Sleep Screening ◽  
Time Limitations ◽  
And Training ◽  
Better Than

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONInsomnia has negative health effects and may indicate underlying serious conditions, but is underdiagnosed and often not discussed with a doctor. AIMThis study aimed to explore the utility and workability in New Zealand community pharmacies of a 23-question sleep-screening tool adapted from the Short Auckland Sleep Questionnaire. METHODSA multidisciplinary advisory group (sleep specialist, general practitioner and pharmacists) discussed the tool, pharmacists’ capability in managing insomnia and training needs for pharmacists, and recommended management strategies, including referral points. Twelve community pharmacists piloted the tool with people with insomnia who presented in pharmacies, recording the time it took to administer the tool. The pharmacists were then surveyed about their experiences with the tool and possible improvements. RESULTSTen pharmacists took an average of 12.4 min (range 4–35 min) for each use of the screening tool with 62 people with insomnia. Most pharmacists found the screening tool easy to administer, organised and easy to follow and nine of 10 said it provided better information than their usual consultation. Seven of 10 pharmacists would use it again. Time limitations and low recruitment were potential barriers to usage especially for pharmacy owners. DISCUSSIONThe screening tool could provide a useful addition to pharmacists’ toolkits, aiding information gathering and better than usual practice. The tool was acceptable to most pharmacists, but its use takes time and remuneration needs consideration.

scholarly journals ‘Self-screening’ for malnutrition with an electronic version of the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (‘MUST’) in hospital outpatients: concurrent validity, preference and ease of use

2018 ◽  
Vol 120 (5) ◽  
pp. 528-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abbie L. Cawood ◽  
Emily R. Walters ◽  
Sarah K. E. Sharp ◽  
Marinos Elia ◽  
Rebecca J. Stratton
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Universal Screening ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Electronic Version ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Perfect Agreement ◽  
Paper Version ◽  
Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool ◽  
Hospital Outpatients

AbstractSelf-screening using an electronic version of the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (‘MUST’) has been developed but its implementation requires investigation. A total of 100 outpatients (mean age 50 (sd 16) years; 57 % male) self-screened with an electronic version of ‘MUST’ and were then screened by a healthcare professional (HCP) to assess concurrent validity. Ease of use, time to self-screen and prevalence of malnutrition were also assessed. A further twenty outpatients (mean age 54 (sd 15) years; 55 % male) examined preference between self- screening with paper and electronic versions of ‘MUST’. For the three-category classification of ‘MUST’ (low, medium and high risk), agreement between electronic self-screening and HCP screening was 94 % (κ=0·74, se 0·092; P<0·001). For the two-category classification (low risk; medium+high risk) agreement was 96 % (κ=0·82, se 0·085; P<0·001), comparable with the previously reported paper-based self-screening. In all, 15 % of patients categorised themselves ‘at risk’ of malnutrition (5 % medium, 10 % high). Electronic self-screening took 3 min (sd 1·2 min), 40 % faster than previously reported for the paper-based version. Patients found the tool easy or very easy to understand (99 %) and complete (98 %). Patients that assessed both tools found the electronic tool easier to complete (65 %) and preferred it (55 %) to the paper version. Electronic self-screening using ‘MUST’ in a heterogeneous group of hospital outpatients is acceptable, user-friendly and has ‘substantial to almost-perfect’ agreement with HCP screening. The electronic format appears to be as agreeable and often the preferred format when compared with the validated paper-based ‘MUST’ self-screening tool.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document