Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
- 2022 (6)
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (4)
- Postprint (2)
Sprache
- Englisch (6)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (6) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- validation study (6) (entfernen)
Despite the positive effects of including patients’ preferences into therapy on psychotherapy outcomes, there are still few thoroughly validated assessment tools at hand. We translated the 18-item Cooper-Norcross Inventory of Preferences (C-NIP) into German and aimed at replicating its factor structure. Further, we investigated the reliability of the questionnaire and its convergence with trait measures. A heterogeneous sample of N = 969 participants took part in our online survey. Performing ESEM models, we found acceptable model fit for a four-factor structure similar to the original factor structure. Furthermore, we propose an alternative model following the adjustment of single items. The German C-NIP showed acceptable to good reliability, as well as small correlations with Big-Five personality traits, trait and attachment anxiety, locus of control, and temporal focus. However, we recommend further replication of the factor structure and further validation of the C-NIP.
Despite the positive effects of including patients’ preferences into therapy on psychotherapy outcomes, there are still few thoroughly validated assessment tools at hand. We translated the 18-item Cooper-Norcross Inventory of Preferences (C-NIP) into German and aimed at replicating its factor structure. Further, we investigated the reliability of the questionnaire and its convergence with trait measures. A heterogeneous sample of N = 969 participants took part in our online survey. Performing ESEM models, we found acceptable model fit for a four-factor structure similar to the original factor structure. Furthermore, we propose an alternative model following the adjustment of single items. The German C-NIP showed acceptable to good reliability, as well as small correlations with Big-Five personality traits, trait and attachment anxiety, locus of control, and temporal focus. However, we recommend further replication of the factor structure and further validation of the C-NIP.
Despite the positive effects of including patients' preferences into therapy on psychotherapy outcomes, there are still few thoroughly validated assessment tools at hand. We translated the 18-item Cooper-Norcross Inventory of Preferences (C-NIP) into German and aimed at replicating its factor structure. Further, we investigated the reliability of the questionnaire and its convergence with trait measures. A heterogeneous sample of N = 969 participants took part in our online survey. Performing ESEM models, we found acceptable model fit for a four-factor structure similar to the original factor structure. Furthermore, we propose an alternative model following the adjustment of single items. The German C-NIP showed acceptable to good reliability, as well as small correlations with Big-Five personality traits, trait and attachment anxiety, locus of control, and temporal focus. However, we recommend further replication of the factor structure and further validation of the C-NIP.
Background and Aims Wearable inertial sensors may offer additional kinematic parameters of the shoulder compared to traditional instruments such as goniometers when elaborate and time-consuming data processing procedures are undertaken. However, in clinical practice simple-real time motion analysis is required to improve clinical reasoning. Therefore, the aim was to assess the criterion validity between a portable "off-the-shelf" sensor-software system (IMU) and optical motion (Mocap) for measuring kinematic parameters during active shoulder movements. Methods 24 healthy participants (9 female, 15 male, age 29 +/- 4 years, height 177 +/- 11 cm, weight 73 +/- 14 kg) were included. Range of motion (ROM), total range of motion (TROM), peak and mean angular velocity of both systems were assessed during simple (abduction/adduction, horizontal flexion/horizontal extension, vertical flexion/extension, and external/internal rotation) and complex shoulder movements. Criterion validity was determined using intraclass-correlation coefficients (ICC), root mean square error (RMSE) and Bland and Altmann analysis (bias; upper and lower limits of agreement). Results ROM and TROM analysis revealed inconsistent validity during simple (ICC: 0.040-0.733, RMSE: 9.7 degrees-20.3 degrees, bias: 1.2 degrees-50.7 degrees) and insufficient agreement during complex shoulder movements (ICC: 0.104-0.453, RMSE: 10.1 degrees-23.3 degrees, bias: 1.0 degrees-55.9 degrees). Peak angular velocity (ICC: 0.202-0.865, RMSE: 14.6 degrees/s-26.7 degrees/s, bias: 10.2 degrees/s-29.9 degrees/s) and mean angular velocity (ICC: 0.019-0.786, RMSE:6.1 degrees/s-34.2 degrees/s, bias: 1.6 degrees/s-27.8 degrees/s) were inconsistent. Conclusions The "off-the-shelf" sensor-software system showed overall insufficient agreement with the gold standard. Further development of commercial IMU-software-solutions may increase measurement accuracy and permit their integration into everyday clinical practice.
Background and Aims Wearable inertial sensors may offer additional kinematic parameters of the shoulder compared to traditional instruments such as goniometers when elaborate and time-consuming data processing procedures are undertaken. However, in clinical practice simple-real time motion analysis is required to improve clinical reasoning. Therefore, the aim was to assess the criterion validity between a portable "off-the-shelf" sensor-software system (IMU) and optical motion (Mocap) for measuring kinematic parameters during active shoulder movements. Methods 24 healthy participants (9 female, 15 male, age 29 +/- 4 years, height 177 +/- 11 cm, weight 73 +/- 14 kg) were included. Range of motion (ROM), total range of motion (TROM), peak and mean angular velocity of both systems were assessed during simple (abduction/adduction, horizontal flexion/horizontal extension, vertical flexion/extension, and external/internal rotation) and complex shoulder movements. Criterion validity was determined using intraclass-correlation coefficients (ICC), root mean square error (RMSE) and Bland and Altmann analysis (bias; upper and lower limits of agreement). Results ROM and TROM analysis revealed inconsistent validity during simple (ICC: 0.040-0.733, RMSE: 9.7 degrees-20.3 degrees, bias: 1.2 degrees-50.7 degrees) and insufficient agreement during complex shoulder movements (ICC: 0.104-0.453, RMSE: 10.1 degrees-23.3 degrees, bias: 1.0 degrees-55.9 degrees). Peak angular velocity (ICC: 0.202-0.865, RMSE: 14.6 degrees/s-26.7 degrees/s, bias: 10.2 degrees/s-29.9 degrees/s) and mean angular velocity (ICC: 0.019-0.786, RMSE:6.1 degrees/s-34.2 degrees/s, bias: 1.6 degrees/s-27.8 degrees/s) were inconsistent. Conclusions The "off-the-shelf" sensor-software system showed overall insufficient agreement with the gold standard. Further development of commercial IMU-software-solutions may increase measurement accuracy and permit their integration into everyday clinical practice.
This study aimed to validate the Norwegian version of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSFS) and to examine its relations with indicators of well-being and ill-being. Additionally, despite the vast number of studies employing the BPNSFS, norms related to the BPNSFS are currently lacking.
Therefore, we also aimed to provide normative data for this scale. Data were collected among a representative sample of 326 participants (M age = 42.90 years, SD = 14.76; range 18-70) in Norway, of which 49.7% was female.
Results yielded evidence for a six-factor structure (i.e., combining satisfaction/frustration with the type of need) and showed the subscales to be highly reliable. Subsequent structural equation modeling showed that both need satisfaction and need frustration related strongly to vitality, life satisfaction, and internalizing symptoms, but in opposite ways. Norm scores were provided, thereby differentiating between women and men and different age groups.
These findings support the use of the Norwegian BPNSFS and provide researchers and professionals with normative data on the most widely used tool to assess individuals' satisfaction and frustration of the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness.