Validation of a new screening questionnaire for disordered eating behaviors in men.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop an instrument to identify disordered eating behaviors (DEB) in college men (hereafter, DEBM-Q). METHODS: A two-stage project consisting of a diagnostic scale construction (n1 = 9 for interviews, n2 = 9 for cognitive laboratory) and a validation study with a cross-sectional sample (N = 570) was carried out. Both semi-structured interviews and a cognitive laboratory with nine participants were conducted to obtain DEBM-Q items. DEBM-Q was applied to 570 freshmen male in Mexico City. Psychometric characteristics and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) were analyzed. An item-total correlation value greater than 0.30 was determined, and factor loads greater than 0.40 were considered valid. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA, n1 = 297) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA, n2 = 273) were performed. RESULTS: Two fixed factors explaining 55.08% of the total variance were extracted. Factor 1, "Drive for Thinness" (8 items), explained 30.84% of the variance, whereas factor 2, "Drive for Muscularity" (8 items), explained 24.23% of the variance. Cronbach's alpha for the whole questionnaire was 0.84. DEBM-Q was correlated with the Dutch Food Restriction Scale (RS) (r = 0.52, p < 0.001), Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) (r = 0.46, p < 0.001), Emotional Eating Scale (EES) (r = 0.18, p < 0.001), and Negative Affect Subscale (PANAS-X) (r = 0.11, p < 0.005). CONCLUSION: DEBM-Q is a valid and practical short screening tool (16 items) allowing early identification of disordered eating in young men, thereby facilitating clinical management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V: Opinions of authorities, based on descriptive studies, narrative reviews, clinical experience, or reports of expert committees.

Psychometric properties of the reading comprehension test ECOMPLEC. Sec / Propiedades psicométricas de la prueba de compresión lectora ECOMPLEC.SEC

ANTECEDENTES: en ciencias sociales, del comportamiento y de salud es habitual usar tests breves. El tamaño del test puede afectar a la correcta identificación de ítems con DIF. Este trabajo compara la eficacia relativa de la Regresión Logística Discriminante (RLD) e IRTLRDIF en la detección del DIF en tests cortos politómicos. MÉTODO: se diseñó un estudio de simulación. Se manipuló tamaño del test, tamaño de la muestra, cantidad DIF y número de categorías de respuesta al ítem. Se evaluó el Error Tipo I y la potencia. RESULTADOS: en las condiciones de no-DIF IRTLRDIF y RLD mostraron tasas de Error Tipo I cercanas al nivel nominal. En tests con DIF las tasas de Error Tipo I dependieron del tamaño del test, de la muestra, cantidad de DIF, contaminación del test y número de categorías del ítem. RLD presentó mayor tasa de Error Tipo I que IRTLRDIF. La potencia estuvo afectada por la cantidad de DIF y tamaño de la muestra. En tests muy cortos RLD mostró mayor potencia que IRTLRDIF. CONCLUSIONES: en tests cortos y con DIF las tasas de Error Tipo I fueron elevadas. La potencia de IRTLRDIF y RLD fue relativamente baja en tests cortos y tamaños muestrales pequeños BACKGROUND: COOMPLEC.Sec is a reading comprehension test for secondary students, conceived from a multidimensional perspective in line with large-scale educational surveys such as PISA or PIRLS. The objective of this study was to validate the theoretical model of ECOMPLEC.Sec. A bifactor model that postulates the existence of a general reading comprehension factor and three specific factors provided a good fit to the data. METHOD: 1,912 adolescents (13-18 years) participated in this study. Data analysis included construct validity via confirmatory factor analysis, and factors were regressed onto observed covariates for the interpretation of the constructs. Reliability was calculated from a non-linear SEM in order to justify the interpretability of the observed scale and subscale scores. RESULTS: the bifactor model exhibited a significantly better fit to the data than the second-order model. Furthermore, construct validity analysis suggests the existence of specific reading comprehension factors. Finally, the reliability study also supports the idea of using a total score to obtain a measure of reading comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: ECOMPLEC.Sec displays a valid parsimonious factor structure, as well as metric properties that make it a suitable tool to assess reading comprehension

ANTECEDENTES: ECOMPLEC.Sec es una prueba de comprensión lectora para estudiantes de Secundaria concebido desde una perspectiva multidimensional en consonancia con las pruebas educativas de gran escala como PISA o PIRLS. El objetivo de este estudio fue la validación del modelo teórico de ECOMPLEC.Sec. Un modelo bifactorial que presupone la existencia de un factor general de comprensión lectora y tres factores específicos ajustó adecuadamente a los datos. MÉTODO: 1.912 adolescentes (edades entre 13-18 años) participaron en este estudio. Los análisis estadísticos incluyen un análisis factorial confirmatorio cuyos factores se predicen por cuatro covariables con el fin de aportar significado a los constructos. La fiabilidad se abordó desde un modelo no lineal SEM para ayudar en la interpretación de las puntuaciones observadas de las escalas y subescalas. RESULTADOS: el modelo bifactorial exhibió un ajuste significativamente mejor que el modelo factorial de segundo orden. Las evidencias de validez de constructo apuntan a la existencia de factores específicos de comprensión lectora. CONCLUSIONES: ECOMPLEC.Sec muestra una estructura factorial parsimoniosa junto con unas propiedades psicométricas que hacen de ella una prueba adecuada para evaluar la comprensión lectora

Psychometric properties of the reading comprehension test ECOMPLEC.Sec.

BACKGROUND: ECOMPLEC.Sec is a reading comprehension test for secondary students, conceived from a multidimensional perspective in line with large-scale educational surveys such as PISA or PIRLS. The objective of this study was to validate the theoretical model of ECOMPLEC.Sec. A bifactor model that postulates the existence of a general reading comprehension factor and three specific factors provided a good fit to the data. METHOD: 1,912 adolescents (13-18 years) participated in this study. Data analysis included construct validity via confirmatory factor analysis, and factors were regressed onto observed covariates for the interpretation of the constructs. Reliability was calculated from a non-linear SEM in order to justify the interpretability of the observed scale and subscale scores. RESULTS: The bifactor model exhibited a significantly better fit to the data than the second-order model. Furthermore, construct validity analysis suggests the existence of specific reading comprehension factors. Finally, the reliability study also supports the idea of using a total score to obtain a measure of reading comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: ECOMPLEC.Sec displays a valid parsimonious factor structure, as well as metric properties that make it a suitable tool to assess reading comprehension.

Factor structure, validity, and reliability of the Spanish version of the Women's Views of Birth Labour Satisfaction Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: to analyse the factor structure of the Women's Views of Birth Labour Satisfaction Questionnaire (WOMBLSQ) using confirmatory factor analysis. DESIGN: prospective cross-sectional study. Data were collected through a mail questionnaire. SETTING: the study was conducted at a University Hospital in Madrid. PARTICIPANTS: 298 pregnant Spanish women. METHODS: confirmatory factor analysis was used to identify the best-fit model. FINDINGS: the best fit for the Spanish version of the scale was an eight-factor model, after removing the control factor from the original scale, and merging all items related to pain into one. Internal consistency was satisfactory for the full scale (.82), although the reliability of two factors was less than .45. CONCLUSION: this study has provided preliminary evidence that supports the use of the Spanish version of the WOMBLSQ to assess childbirth satisfaction in Spanish-speaking women. Nevertheless, further studies will be needed to determine the validity of the questionnaire and to compare it to other existing tools.