MyMedR

Displaying publications 81 - 85 of 85 in total

Abstract:

Sort:

Cross-cultural validation and measurement invariance of anxiety and depression symptoms: A study of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) in 42 countries

Quintana GR, Ponce FP, Escudero-Pastén JI, Santibáñez-Palma JF, Nagy L, Koós M, et al.

J Affect Disord, 2024 Apr 01;350:991-1006.
PMID: 38244805 DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.01.127

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety are among the most prevalent mental health issues experienced worldwide. However, whereas cross-cultural studies utilize psychometrically valid and reliable scales, fewer can meaningfully compare these conditions across different groups. To address this gap, the current study aimed to psychometrically assess the Brief Symptomatology Index (BSI) in 42 countries.
METHODS: Using data from the International Sex Survey (N = 82,243; Mage = 32.39; SDage = 12.52; women: n = 46,874; 57 %), we examined the reliability of depression and anxiety symptom scores of the BSI-18, as well as evaluated evidence of construct, invariance, and criterion-related validity in predicting clinically relevant variables across countries, languages, genders, and sexual orientations.
RESULTS: Results corroborated an invariant, two-factor structure across all groups tested, exhibiting excellent reliability estimates for both subscales. The 'caseness' criterion effectively discriminated among those at low and high risk of depression and anxiety, yielding differential effects on the clinical criteria examined.
LIMITATIONS: The predictive validation was not made against a clinical diagnosis, and the full BSI-18 scale was not examined (excluding the somatization sub-dimension), limiting the validation scope of the BSI-18. Finally, the study was conducted online, mainly by advertisements through social media, ultimately skewing our sample towards women, younger, and highly educated populations.
CONCLUSIONS: The results support that the BSI-12 is a valid and reliable assessment tool for assessing depression and anxiety symptoms across countries, languages, genders, and sexual orientations. Further, its caseness criterion can discriminate well between participants at high and low risk of depression and anxiety.
The short version of the Sexual Distress Scale (SDS-3): Measurement invariance across countries, gender identities, and sexual orientations

Lin CY, Tsai MC, Koós M, Nagy L, Kraus SW, Demetrovics Z, et al.

Int J Clin Health Psychol, 2024;24(2):100461.
PMID: 38706570 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100461

BACKGROUND: The three-item Sexual Distress Scale (SDS-3) has been frequently used to assess distress related to sexuality in public health surveys and research on sexual wellbeing. However, its psychometric properties and measurement invariance across cultural, gender and sexual subgroups have not yet been examined. This multinational study aimed to validate the SDS-3 and test its psychometric properties, including measurement invariance across language, country, gender identity, and sexual orientation groups.
METHODS: We used global survey data from 82,243 individuals (Mean age=32.39 years; 40.3 % men, 57.0 % women, 2.8 % non-binary, and 0.6 % other genders) participating in the International Sexual Survey (ISS; https://internationalsexsurvey.org/) across 42 countries and 26 languages. Participants completed the SDS-3, as well as questions regarding sociodemographic characteristics, including gender identity and sexual orientation.
RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported a unidimensional factor structure for the SDS-3, and multi-group CFA (MGCFA) suggested that this factor structure was invariant across countries, languages, gender identities, and sexual orientations. Cronbach's α for the unidimensional score was 0.83 (range between 0.76 and 0.89), and McDonald's ω was 0.84 (range between 0.76 and 0.90). Participants who did not experience sexual problems had significantly lower SDS-3 total scores (M = 2.99; SD=2.54) compared to those who reported sexual problems (M = 5.60; SD=3.00), with a large effect size (Cohen's d = 1.01 [95 % CI=-1.03, -0.98]; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The SDS-3 has a unidimensional factor structure and appears to be valid and reliable for measuring sexual distress among individuals from different countries, gender identities, and sexual orientations.
Evaluating the factor structure and measurement invariance of the 20-item short version of the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale across multiple countries, languages, and gender identities

Fournier L, Bőthe B, Demetrovics Z, Koós M, Kraus SW, Nagy L, et al.

Assessment, 2024 Jul 26.
PMID: 39054862 DOI: 10.1177/10731911241259560

The UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Model and the various psychometric instruments developed and validated based on this model are well established in clinical and research settings. However, evidence regarding the psychometric validity, reliability, and equivalence across multiple countries of residence, languages, or gender identities, including gender-diverse individuals, is lacking to date. Using data from the International Sex Survey (N = 82,243), confirmatory factor analyses and measurement invariance analyses were performed on the preestablished five-factor structure of the 20-item short version of the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale to examine whether (a) psychometric validity and reliability and (b) psychometric equivalence hold across 34 country-of-residence-related, 22 language-related, and three gender-identity-related groups. The results of the present study extend the latter psychometric instrument's well-established relevance to 26 countries, 13 languages, and three gender identities. Most notably, psychometric validity and reliability were evidenced across nine novel translations included in the present study (i.e., Croatian, English, German, Hebrew, Korean, Macedonian, Polish, Portuguese-Portugal, and Spanish-Latin American) and psychometric equivalence was evidenced across all three gender identities included in the present study (i.e., women, men, and gender-diverse individuals).
Cross-Cultural Validation of the Sexual Desire Inventory (SDI-2) in 42 Countries and 26 Languages

Castro-Calvo J, Beltrán-Martínez P, Ballester-Arnal R, Nagy L, Koós M, Kraus SW, et al.

J Sex Res, 2024 Nov 19.
PMID: 39560207 DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2024.2417023

Sexual desire is a complex construct with important implications for sexual functioning and well-being. In this research, we translated the Sexual Desire Inventory (SDI-2), a widely used scale for assessing sexual (desire), into 25 languages from English and used data from the International Sex Survey (ISS) to (a) investigate its psychometric properties (i.e. factorial structure, reliability, validity, and measurement invariance) and (b) explore the expression of sexual desire across different countries, genders, and sexual orientations. A total of 82,243 participants from 42 countries completed the SDI-2, along with other sexuality-related scales. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a three-factor solution for the SDI-2 (CFI = .980; RMSEA = .060), encompassing the domains of "Partner-related," "Attractive-person-related," and "Solitary" sexual desire. The reliability of the total score and subscales were excellent. Likewise, correlations with other sexuality-related variables were positive yet weak-to-moderate in effect size. Measurement invariance tests supported its use across countries, languages, genders, and sexual orientations. Analysis of SDI-2 scores according to these variables supported its ability to capture group-based differences in sexual desire. In sum, the SDI-2 constitutes a psychometrically robust measure for the assessment of sexual desire in non-clinical samples with utility in large-scale cross-cultural studies.
Fulltext Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1

Klionsky DJ, Abdel-Aziz AK, Abdelfatah S, Abdellatif M, Abdoli A, Abel S, et al.

Autophagy, 2021 Jan;17(1):1-382.
PMID: 33634751 DOI: 10.1080/15548627.2020.1797280

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.