Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32411053›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020

Online Validation of a Battery of Questionnaires for the Assessment of Family Functioning and Related Factors.

Luigi Lavorgna, Marialaura Di Tella, Giuseppina Miele, Stefania Federica De Mercanti, Lidia Mislin Streito, Virginia Perutelli, Simona Bonavita, Lorys Castelli, Marinella Clerico

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Luigi LavorgnaDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Italy.
Marialaura Di TellaDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Giuseppina MieleII Clinic of Neurology, AOU University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Stefania Federica De MercantiDepartment of Clinical and Biological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Turin, AOU San Luigi Gonzaga, Turin, Italy.
Lidia Mislin StreitoDepartment of Clinical and Biological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Turin, AOU San Luigi Gonzaga, Turin, Italy.
Virginia PerutelliDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Simona BonavitaII Clinic of Neurology, AOU University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Lorys CastelliDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Marinella ClericoDepartment of Clinical and Biological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Turin, AOU San Luigi Gonzaga, Turin, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFamily functioning relies on different factors that are related to the individual characteristics of each member, the social context in which the family nucleus is integrated, and the internal and interpersonal family factors. The Short Version of the Family Assessment Measure-III, Dyadic Adjustment Scale, Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment, Twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support are among the most commonly employed self-report measures for the assessment of family functioning and related factors. Traditionally, these scales have been administered using paper-and-pencil versions. However, with increased access to the Internet, online administration of questionnaires has become more common. The present study aimed to validate an online version of each of the above-mentioned questionnaires in a heterogeneous sample of Italian healthy individuals.

methodsOne-hundred participants were recruited for each questionnaire. A crossover design was used in each validation. The minimum important difference (MID) was applied to evaluate the differences in the variances of the paper-and-pencil and online format scores. A MID >0.5 is a reasonable first approximation of a threshold of important change. Taking into account the cross over design, mean difference between pencil-and-paper and online versions, and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient were also estimated by mixed models.

resultsThe MID was <0.5 for all the instruments used. Therefore, no significant difference was observed between the score variances of the paper-and-pencil and online formats of all the questionnaires. Moreover, for each questionnaire the difference between the means of online and paper-and-pencil administrations scores (mean O-P) was calculated. We reported 95% confidence intervals that did not include the 0; therefore, mean (O-P) was not statistically significant.

conclusionsThe current findings indicate that the online versions of all the questionnaires we administered can be considered reliable tools for the assessment of family functioning and related factors.

Indexed as

alexithymiafamily functioningmarital relationshipsonline validationparental and peer attachmentpsychological distresssocial support

Identifiers

PMID32411053
PMCPMC7199646

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.