Resilience measurement scale in family caregivers of children with cancer: Multidimensional item response theory modeling.

cancer family caregivers item response theory psychometric properties resilience

Journal

Frontiers in psychiatry
ISSN: 1664-0640
Titre abrégé: Front Psychiatry
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101545006

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 03 07 2022
accepted: 23 12 2022
entrez: 2 2 2023
pubmed: 3 2 2023
medline: 3 2 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Currently, information about the psychometric properties of the Resilience Measurement Scale (RESI-M) in family caregivers of children with cancer according to item response theory (IRT) is not available; this information could complement and confirm the findings available from classical test theory (CTT). The objective of this study was to test the five-factor structure of the RESI-M using a full information confirmatory multidimensional IRT graded response model and to estimate the multidimensional item-level parameters of discrimination (MDISC) and difficulty (MDIFF) from the RESI-M scale to investigate its construct validity and level of measurement error. An observational study was carried out, which included a sample of 633 primary caregivers of children with cancer, who were recruited through nonprobabilistic sampling. The caregivers responded to a battery of tests that included a sociodemographic variables questionnaire, the RESI-M, and measures of depression, quality of life, anxiety, and caregiver burden to explore convergent and divergent validity. The main findings confirmed a five-factor structure of the RESI-M scale, with RMSEA = 0.078 (95% CI: 0.075, 0.080), TLI = 0.90, and CFI = 0.91. The estimation of the MDISC and MDIFF parameters indicated different values for each item, showing that all the items contribute differentially to the measurement of the dimensions of resilience. That regardless of the measurement approach (IRT or CTT), the five-factor model of the RESI-M is valid at the theoretical, empirical, and methodological levels.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Currently, information about the psychometric properties of the Resilience Measurement Scale (RESI-M) in family caregivers of children with cancer according to item response theory (IRT) is not available; this information could complement and confirm the findings available from classical test theory (CTT). The objective of this study was to test the five-factor structure of the RESI-M using a full information confirmatory multidimensional IRT graded response model and to estimate the multidimensional item-level parameters of discrimination (MDISC) and difficulty (MDIFF) from the RESI-M scale to investigate its construct validity and level of measurement error.
Methods UNASSIGNED
An observational study was carried out, which included a sample of 633 primary caregivers of children with cancer, who were recruited through nonprobabilistic sampling. The caregivers responded to a battery of tests that included a sociodemographic variables questionnaire, the RESI-M, and measures of depression, quality of life, anxiety, and caregiver burden to explore convergent and divergent validity.
Results UNASSIGNED
The main findings confirmed a five-factor structure of the RESI-M scale, with RMSEA = 0.078 (95% CI: 0.075, 0.080), TLI = 0.90, and CFI = 0.91. The estimation of the MDISC and MDIFF parameters indicated different values for each item, showing that all the items contribute differentially to the measurement of the dimensions of resilience.
Conclusion UNASSIGNED
That regardless of the measurement approach (IRT or CTT), the five-factor model of the RESI-M is valid at the theoretical, empirical, and methodological levels.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.985456 PMID: 36727086 PMC: PMC9885114
pubmed: 36727086
doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.985456
pmc: PMC9885114
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

985456

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Jiménez, Moral de la Rubia, Varela-Garay, Merino-Soto and Toledano-Toledano.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

BMJ Open. 2018 Jun 6;8(6):e021687
pubmed: 29880570
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011 Feb 04;9:8
pubmed: 21294858
Psychooncology. 2015 Dec;24(12):1746-53
pubmed: 25808790
Child Care Health Dev. 2014 Mar;40(2):184-94
pubmed: 23121336
Biopsychosoc Med. 2018 Dec 12;12:20
pubmed: 30559833
Support Care Cancer. 2014 May;22(5):1277-86
pubmed: 24326951
Psychooncology. 2016 Apr;25(4):428-34
pubmed: 26332297
Psychol Methods. 2016 Jun;21(2):137-50
pubmed: 26523435
PLoS One. 2016 Apr 01;11(4):e0152778
pubmed: 27035912
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 23;17(21):
pubmed: 33114144
Depress Anxiety. 2003;18(2):76-82
pubmed: 12964174
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2019 Jul;28(4):e13042
pubmed: 30990936
Child Health Care. 2016;45(3):303-322
pubmed: 27630380
Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2015 Apr;36(4):279-85
pubmed: 25988684
BMC Public Health. 2019 Aug 27;19(1):1164
pubmed: 31455340
Front Psychol. 2016 Feb 09;7:109
pubmed: 26903916
Gerontologist. 1980 Dec;20(6):649-55
pubmed: 7203086
J Psychosoc Oncol. 2015;33(5):504-50
pubmed: 26181302
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 26;17(21):
pubmed: 33114556
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988 Dec;56(6):893-7
pubmed: 3204199
BMC Psychol. 2019 Dec 21;7(1):85
pubmed: 31864414
Psychooncology. 2016 Mar;25(3):266-74
pubmed: 25976620
Cad Saude Publica. 2018 Oct 11;34(10):e00179717
pubmed: 30329001
Psychooncology. 2017 Jan;26(1):125-132
pubmed: 26489522
Biopsychosoc Med. 2019 Mar 08;13:6
pubmed: 30899323
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jan 17;18(2):
pubmed: 33477253
Psychol Assess. 2019 Dec;31(12):1395-1411
pubmed: 31380696
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 Dec 13;15(1):242
pubmed: 29237460
Support Care Cancer. 2014 Feb;22(2):503-11
pubmed: 24101152
Biopsychosoc Med. 2020 Oct 22;14:29
pubmed: 33110443
Indian J Pediatr. 2015 Nov;82(11):1006-11
pubmed: 25976615
Psychooncology. 2013 Jul;22(7):1587-93
pubmed: 22972765
PLoS One. 2018 Nov 28;13(11):e0206917
pubmed: 30485299
Psychol Methods. 2021 Dec 23;:
pubmed: 34941326
Am Psychol. 2002 Dec;57(12):1060-73
pubmed: 12613157
Healthcare (Basel). 2020 Nov 03;8(4):
pubmed: 33153086
Assessment. 2021 Mar;28(2):395-412
pubmed: 31786956
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2003;12(2):65-76
pubmed: 12830300
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020 Apr 19;18(1):104
pubmed: 32307007

Auteurs

Said Jiménez (S)

Unidad de Investigación en Medicina Basada en Evidencias, Hospital Infantil de México Federico Gómez, National Institute of Health, Mexico City, Mexico.

José Moral de la Rubia (J)

Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Monterrey, Mexico.

Rosa María Varela-Garay (RM)

Departamento de Trabajo Social y Servicios Sociales, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Seville, Spain.

Cesar Merino-Soto (C)

Instituto de Investigación en Psicología, Universidad de San Martin de Porres, Lima, Peru.

Filiberto Toledano-Toledano (F)

Unidad de Investigación en Medicina Basada en Evidencias, Hospital Infantil de México Federico Gómez, National Institute of Health, Mexico City, Mexico.
Unidad de Investigación Sociomédica, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra, Mexico City, Mexico.
Dirección de Investigación y Diseminación del Conocimiento, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias e Innovación para la Formación de Comunidad Científica, INDEHUS, Mexico City, Mexico.

Classifications MeSH