两种评估轻度脑外伤患者灾难化和恐惧逃避行为的工具的心理计量特性。

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES Neuropsychology Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-23 DOI:10.1037/neu0000954
Skye King, Sven Z Stapert, Melloney L M Wijenberg, Ieke Winkens, Jeanine A Verbunt, Marleen M Rijkeboer, Joukje van der Naalt, Caroline M van Heugten
{"title":"两种评估轻度脑外伤患者灾难化和恐惧逃避行为的工具的心理计量特性。","authors":"Skye King, Sven Z Stapert, Melloney L M Wijenberg, Ieke Winkens, Jeanine A Verbunt, Marleen M Rijkeboer, Joukje van der Naalt, Caroline M van Heugten","doi":"10.1037/neu0000954","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Psychometrically sound measures of catastrophizing about symptoms and fear avoidance behavior are needed to further applications of the fear-avoidance model in mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) for research and clinical purposes. To this end, two questionnaires were adapted (minor), the Postconcussion Symptom Catastrophizing Scale (PCS-CS) and the Fear of Mental Activity Scale (FMA). This study aimed to investigate the factor structure, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and concurrent and construct validity of two adapted questionnaires in a sample of participants with mTBI compared to participants with orthopedic injury and healthy adults.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>One hundred eighty-five mTBI participants (40% female), 180 participants with orthopedic injury (55% female), and 116 healthy adults (55% female) participated in the study. All participants were assessed at two time points (2 weeks postinjury and 3 months) using self-reported questionnaires. Data were collected using online questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings indicated a three-factor model (magnification, rumination, helplessness) with a higher order factor (catastrophizing) for the PCS-CS and a two-factor model (activity avoidance and somatic focus) for the FMA. The results showed strong internal consistency, good test-retest reliability, and good concurrent and convergent validity for the PCS-CS and FMA across all samples.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study has shown that the PCS-CS and FMA are psychometrically sound instruments and can be considered for valid and reliable assessment of catastrophizing about postconcussion like symptoms and fear-avoidance beliefs about mental activities. These instruments can be used in research and clinical practice applications of the fear-avoidance model and add to explanations of prolonged recovery after mTBI. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":19205,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"403-415"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric properties of two instruments assessing catastrophizing and fear-avoidance behavior in mild traumatic brain injury.\",\"authors\":\"Skye King, Sven Z Stapert, Melloney L M Wijenberg, Ieke Winkens, Jeanine A Verbunt, Marleen M Rijkeboer, Joukje van der Naalt, Caroline M van Heugten\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/neu0000954\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Psychometrically sound measures of catastrophizing about symptoms and fear avoidance behavior are needed to further applications of the fear-avoidance model in mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) for research and clinical purposes. To this end, two questionnaires were adapted (minor), the Postconcussion Symptom Catastrophizing Scale (PCS-CS) and the Fear of Mental Activity Scale (FMA). This study aimed to investigate the factor structure, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and concurrent and construct validity of two adapted questionnaires in a sample of participants with mTBI compared to participants with orthopedic injury and healthy adults.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>One hundred eighty-five mTBI participants (40% female), 180 participants with orthopedic injury (55% female), and 116 healthy adults (55% female) participated in the study. All participants were assessed at two time points (2 weeks postinjury and 3 months) using self-reported questionnaires. Data were collected using online questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings indicated a three-factor model (magnification, rumination, helplessness) with a higher order factor (catastrophizing) for the PCS-CS and a two-factor model (activity avoidance and somatic focus) for the FMA. The results showed strong internal consistency, good test-retest reliability, and good concurrent and convergent validity for the PCS-CS and FMA across all samples.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study has shown that the PCS-CS and FMA are psychometrically sound instruments and can be considered for valid and reliable assessment of catastrophizing about postconcussion like symptoms and fear-avoidance beliefs about mental activities. These instruments can be used in research and clinical practice applications of the fear-avoidance model and add to explanations of prolonged recovery after mTBI. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19205,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuropsychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"403-415\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuropsychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000954\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000954","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:为了进一步将轻度脑外伤(mTBI)中的恐惧-回避模型应用于研究和临床,需要对症状灾难化和恐惧回避行为进行心理测量。为此,我们对脑震荡后症状灾难化量表(PCS-CS)和心理活动恐惧量表(FMA)这两份问卷进行了改编。本研究旨在调查两份改编问卷的因子结构、内部一致性、重测信度、并发效度和建构效度:185名mTBI参与者(40%为女性)、180名矫形损伤参与者(55%为女性)和116名健康成人(55%为女性)参加了研究。所有参与者均在两个时间点(受伤后 2 周和 3 个月)接受了自我报告问卷调查。数据通过在线问卷收集:研究结果表明,PCS-CS 是一个三因素模型(放大、反刍、无助)和一个高阶因素(灾难化),FMA 是一个双因素模型(活动回避和躯体关注)。研究结果表明,在所有样本中,PCS-CS 和 FMA 具有很强的内部一致性、良好的测试-再测可靠性以及良好的并发效度和收敛效度:本研究表明,PCS-CS 和 FMA 是心理测量学上可靠的工具,可用于对脑震荡后类似症状的灾难化和心理活动的恐惧-回避信念进行有效而可靠的评估。这些工具可用于恐惧回避模型的研究和临床实践应用,并有助于解释 mTBI 后恢复期延长的原因。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Psychometric properties of two instruments assessing catastrophizing and fear-avoidance behavior in mild traumatic brain injury.

Objective: Psychometrically sound measures of catastrophizing about symptoms and fear avoidance behavior are needed to further applications of the fear-avoidance model in mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) for research and clinical purposes. To this end, two questionnaires were adapted (minor), the Postconcussion Symptom Catastrophizing Scale (PCS-CS) and the Fear of Mental Activity Scale (FMA). This study aimed to investigate the factor structure, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and concurrent and construct validity of two adapted questionnaires in a sample of participants with mTBI compared to participants with orthopedic injury and healthy adults.

Method: One hundred eighty-five mTBI participants (40% female), 180 participants with orthopedic injury (55% female), and 116 healthy adults (55% female) participated in the study. All participants were assessed at two time points (2 weeks postinjury and 3 months) using self-reported questionnaires. Data were collected using online questionnaires.

Results: Findings indicated a three-factor model (magnification, rumination, helplessness) with a higher order factor (catastrophizing) for the PCS-CS and a two-factor model (activity avoidance and somatic focus) for the FMA. The results showed strong internal consistency, good test-retest reliability, and good concurrent and convergent validity for the PCS-CS and FMA across all samples.

Conclusions: This study has shown that the PCS-CS and FMA are psychometrically sound instruments and can be considered for valid and reliable assessment of catastrophizing about postconcussion like symptoms and fear-avoidance beliefs about mental activities. These instruments can be used in research and clinical practice applications of the fear-avoidance model and add to explanations of prolonged recovery after mTBI. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neuropsychology
Neuropsychology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology publishes original, empirical research; systematic reviews and meta-analyses; and theoretical articles on the relation between brain and human cognitive, emotional, and behavioral function.
期刊最新文献
Capturing cognitive capacity in the everyday environment across a continuum of cognitive decline using a smartwatch n-back task and ecological momentary assessment. Dimensional attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms and executive functioning in adolescence: A multi-informant, population-based twin study. Affliction class moderates the dementing impact of adipokines. Metabolic syndrome and mobility dysfunction in older adults with and without histories of traumatic brain injury: The mediating role of cognition. Getting oriented: Redefining attention deficits in Parkinson's disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1