METHODS: We conducted a nationally representative survey among 1925 adults aged 18-79 years of Chinese, Malay, Indian or other ethnicity. Participants reported socio-demographic characteristics and completed the PMH-I along with measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and psychological distress. Construct validity of the PMH-I was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis and concurrent validity was tested through correlation with other psychological measures. Normative PMH values and differences in population subgroups were estimated.
RESULTS: The six-factor-higher-order structure of the PMH-I comprising six subscales of general coping, emotional support, spirituality, interpersonal skills, personal growth and autonomy and global affect was confirmed. Concurrent validity was shown through significant positive correlation of the total PMH score and its subscales with HRQoL and an inverse correlation with psychological distress. Weighted age, gender and ethnicity-specific norms were derived for the Singapore population. Total PMH was significantly higher in participants aged over 40 years as compared with 18-29 year olds and in non-Chinese ethnic groups as compared with Chinese. These differences were observed for all PMH-I subscales, with the exception of emotional support and interpersonal skills score differences by age. In contrast, gender, marital status, and education level were significantly associated with some of the subscales, but not with total PMH.
CONCLUSIONS: These results support the psychometric properties of the PMH-I in a multi-ethnic Asian population sample. The generalizable population-based norms support the application of the PMH-I for measuring mental health and assessing its determinants within the Singapore general population.
METHODS: A total of 351 participants (Mage = 19.75, SDage = 3.29) were recruited in the study using purposive sampling. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine the factorial structure of the Family Resilience Scale-Malay (FRS-Malay) and measurement invariance between adolescents and young adults. Then, the scale's reliability was investigated using Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega coefficients, and composite reliability index. Finally, we examined the discriminant validity of the FRS-Malay by correlating its score with individual resilience score and examined the incremental validity of the scale using hierarchical multiple regression analysis to test if family resilience can explain individual well-being levels beyond and above individual resilience.
RESULTS: The findings of the confirmatory factor analysis suggest that a single-factor model is supported for both age groups. Furthermore, the scale exhibited scalar invariance between adolescents and young adults. The scale also exhibited good reliability, as the value of Cronbach's alpha, McDonald omega coefficients, and composite reliability index were above 0.80. Additionally, the Pearson correlation analysis showed a positive correlation between the FRS-Malay and individual resilience scores, which supports the discriminant validity of the scale. Similarly, the incremental validity of the scale is also supported. Specifically, family resilience had a positive correlation with well-being, even after controlling for individual resilience in the regression analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: The FRS-Malay has demonstrated good reliability and validity. The scale measures the same construct of family resilience across adolescents and young adults, making it suitable for comparisons. Therefore, this unidimensional tool is appropriate for self-reporting their perceived level of family resilience. It is also useful for studying the development and fluctuation of family resilience in the Malaysian context.
METHODS: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used in this study to evaluate the psychometric features of the flexibility/inflexibility scale (MPFI) in a sample of Iranian university students.
FINDINGS: In the exploratory factor analysis involving a sample of 300 students, six factors were identified for flexibility and six for inflexibility (56.3% males and 43.7% females). In the confirmatory factor analysis with a sample of 388 participants, the results validated 60 items across a total of six flexibility and inflexibility factors. This outcome can serve as a robust estimate for flexibility, inflexibility, the second-order model, and the final model. Cronbach's alpha values for various components, including acceptance, present-moment awareness (or contact with the present moment), self as context, cognitive defusing, values, committed action, total flexibility, experiential avoidance, lack of present-moment awareness, self as content, fusion, lack of contact with values, inaction, and total inflexibility, were reported as follows: 0.818, 0.869, 0.862, 0.904, 0.935, 0.935, 0.942, 0.895, 0.839, 0.883, 0.904, 0.912, 0.941, and 0.941, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The Farsi version of the MPFI for university students has great psychometric qualities, making it a reliable assessment instrument for the ACT.
METHOD: Papers were identified through five electronic databases based on 15 keywords and were included if they met the following criteria: published in English, described the implementation of parent-report instruments, and included children with neurological impairments (either in the report or a related study population).
RESULTS: In total, 1220 relevant abstracts were screened and 22 full-text articles were evaluated. The following six parent-report instruments met the inclusion criteria: (1) Screening Tool of Feeding Problems applied to children, (2) Paediatric Eating Assessment Tool, (3) Paediatric Assessment Scale for Severe Feeding Problems, (4) Montreal Children's Hospital Feeding Scale, (5) Children's Eating Behaviour Inventory, and (6) Behavioural Paediatric Feeding Assessment Scale (BPFAS). Based on comprehensive psychometric testing and consistently good results, the BPFAS was considered the most valid and reliable instrument. The BPFAS also showed good clinical applicability because it was readily available, required a short administration time, and used a simple scoring system.
INTERPRETATION: We reviewed the available parent-report instruments for assessing feeding difficulties in children with neurological impairments. The BPFAS had the best psychometric properties and clinical applicability.
WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Six parent-report instruments were suitable for assessing feeding in children with neurological impairments. The Behavioural Paediatric Feeding Assessment Scale (BPFAS) has the strongest psychometric properties. The BPFAS also has good clinical applicability.
Method: A cross-sectional study was carried out on a sample of medical students in their final year at Universiti Sains Malaysia. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed using AMOS 22 to assess construct validity. Reliability analysis was performed using SPSS 22 to assess internal consistency.
Results: A total of 159 final year medical students participated. CFA showed that the original four-factor model with 15 items achieved acceptable values for the goodness of fit indices, suggesting a good model fit (X2 = 198.295, ChiSq/df = 2.418, RMSEA = 0.095, GFI = 0.867, CFI = 0.953, NFI = 0.923, TLI = 0.940). The Cronbach's alpha values of the mentoring relationship structure, engagement, and competency support domains were 0.96, 0.90 and 0.88, respectively. For autonomy support, the Cronbach's alpha value was 0.62.
Conclusion: MBS demonstrates a satisfactory level of construct validity and a high level of internal consistency in measuring supportive mentor behaviours in a medical school setting. This result suggests that MBS can be used as a mentorship evaluation tool for feedback in the context of a Malaysian medical school.