38 research outputs found

    Reliability and Validity of the Dutch Version of the Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA)

    Get PDF
    Background: The Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA) is a relatively new and short (42-item) questionnaire that measures psychosocial problems in toddlers and consists of a Problem and a Competence scale. In this study the reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the BITSEA were examined for the whole group and for gender and ethnicity subgroups. Methods: Parents of 7140 two-year-old children were invited in the study, of which 3170 (44.4%) parents completed the BITSEA. For evaluation of the score distribution, the presence of floor/ceiling effects was determined. The internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was evaluated and in subsamples the test-retest, parent-childcare provider interrater reliability and concurrent validity with regard to the Child Behavioral Checklist (CBCL). Discriminative validity was evaluated by comparing scores of parents that worry and parents that do not worry about their child's development. Results: The BITSEA showed no floor or ceiling effects. Psychometric properties of the BITSEA Problem and Competence scale were respectively: Cronbach's alphas were 0.76 and 0.63. Test-retest correlations were 0.75 and 0.61. Interrater reliability correlations were 0.30 and 0.17. Concurrent validity was as hypothesised. The BITSEA was able to discriminate between parents that worry about their child and parents that do not worry. The psychometric properties of the BITSEA were comparable across gender and ethnic background. Conclusion: The results in this large-scale study of a diverse sample support the reliability and validity of the BITSEA Problem scale. The BITSEA Competence scale needs further study. The performance of the BITSEA appears to be similar in subgroups by gender and ethnic background

    A survey of eutectoid decomposition in ten Ti-X systems

    No full text
    The mechanism of eutectoid decomposition in ten Ti-X binary systems, wherein X was successively Bi, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, Pd and Pt, has been investigated. In hypo-eutectoid alloys, the bainite reaction (defined in the present context as a nonlamellar dispersion of intermetallic compound particles amongst proeutectoid a) predominated in all alloys studied but Ti-Cu, where both bainite and pear lite were formed. In alloys of near eutectoid composition pearlite was the dominant product in some systems and bainite was in others. These results are essentially independent of reaction temperature. They are quite different from analogous ones in Fe-C alloys, where pearlite is the principal eutectoid structure formed at high temperatures and bainite plays this role at low tem-peratures. The difference between the Ti-X and Fe-C behaviors was explained in terms of the much more pronounced tendency for proeutectoid α plate formation in Ti-X than in Fe-C alloys and, on a theory due to Hillert, of the need for disordered interphase boundaries in order to develop the cooperative growth mode that leads to the evolution of pearlite

    Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations

    No full text
    Purpose: While clinical care is frequently directed at making patients "feel better," patients’ reports on their functioning and well-being (patient-reported outcomes [PROs]) are rarely collected in routine clinical practice. The International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) has developed a User’s Guide for Implementing Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessment in Clinical Practice. This paper summarizes the key issues from the User’s Guide. Methods: Using the literature, an ISOQOL team outlined considerations for using PROs in clinical practice; options for designing the intervention; and strengths, weaknesses, and resource requirements associated with each option. Results: Implementing routine PRO assessment involves a number of methodological and practical decisions, including (1) identifying the goals for collecting PROs in clinical practice, (2) selecting the patients, setting, and timing of assessments, (3) determining which questionnaire(s) to use, (4) choosing a mode for administering and scoring the questionnaire, (5) designing processes for reporting results, (6) identifying aids to facilitate score interpretation, (7) developing strategies for responding to issues identified by the questionnaires, and (8) evaluating the impact of the PRO intervention on the practice. Conclusions: Integrating PROs in clinical practice has the potential to enhance patient-centered care. The online version of the User’s Guide will be updated periodically
    corecore