Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) ; 35(3): 309-314, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35518796

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted many usual processes for recruiting and enrolling research participants. We present our experience with electronic recruitment in a survey study investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health. Adults (≥18 years) in communities served by Baylor Scott and White Health (BSWH) were recruited via patient portal messages sent to BSWH patients with confirmed/suspected COVID-19 as part of the "COVID-19 Digital Care Journey"; BSWH social media posts; other media; referral from other BSWH COVID-19 studies; and internal BSWH communications. Of 1279 enrolled participants, 996 (77.87%) were recruited via the Digital Care Journey and 124 (9.7%) via internal communications. The remaining strategies contributed <5% each. Social media and internal communications recruited larger proportions of those aged 18 to 34 and those with advanced degrees; other media, more racially diverse participants; and the Digital Care Journey and referral from other studies, predominantly participants positive for COVID-19. In terms of volume, the COVID-19 Digital Care Journey was the most successful strategy, particularly for individuals who had COVID-19. However, its dominance contributed to the overrepresentation of white, educated, and female participants. Thus, supplemental strategies to reach individuals not enrolled/engaging with the portal are necessary to achieve representativeness.

2.
Qual Life Res ; 31(9): 2819-2836, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35366196

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Psychometric validity/reliability of 10-item and 2-item abbreviations of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10; CD-RISC-2) was investigated via item response theory and classic approaches. METHODS: We sampled 5023 adult American participants in a June/July 2020 survey on the COVID-19 pandemic's psychological effects. Our questionnaire incorporated the CD-RISC-10 with other validated measures. CD-RISC-10 items were ranked on item-to-scale correlations, loadings on a one-factor confirmatory factor analysis model, and item slope/threshold parameters plus information curves from a unidimensional graded response model. Concurrent validity of the highest ranked item pair was evaluated vis-à-vis the CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-2. Internal consistency, based on average variance extracted (AVE) and multiple reliability coefficients, was also compared. Convergent/divergent validity was tested by correlating anxiety, depression, fear of COVID-19, anxiety sensitivity, coping, and personality measures with both scales and the highest ranked item pair. Binary agreement/classification indexes assessed inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: Items 2 and 9 from CD-RISC-10 ranked the highest. Reliability coefficients were > 0.93, > 0.72, and > 0.82 for the CD-RISC-10, CD-RISC-2, vs summation of items 2 and 9. AVEs were 0.66, 0.67, and 0.77. CD-RISC abbreviations and the summation of items 2 and 9 correlated negatively with anxiety (> - 0.43), depression (> - 0.42), and fear of COVID-19 (> - 0.34); positively with emotional stability (> 0.53) and conscientiousness (> 0.40). Compared to the CD-RISC-2, summative scores of items 2 and 9 more efficiently classified/discriminated high resilience on the CD-RISC-10. CONCLUSION: We confirmed construct validity/reliability of copyrighted CD-RISC abbreviations. The CD-RISC-10's items 2 and 9 were psychometrically more salient than the CD-RISC-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Resilience, Psychological , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Humans , Pandemics , Psychometrics , Quality of Life/psychology , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun ; 22: 100763, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34013091

ABSTRACT

The National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center estimates 294,000 people in the US live with a spinal cord injury (SCI), with approximately 17,810 new cases each year. Although the physical outcomes associated with SCI have been widely studied, the psychological consequences of sustaining a SCI remain largely unexplored. Scant research has focused on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in this population, despite prevalence estimates suggesting that up to 60% of individuals with SCI experience PTSD post-injury, compared to only 7% of the general US population. Fortunately, prolonged exposure therapy (PE) is a well-researched and highly effective treatment for PTSD. However, no trauma focused exposure-based therapy for PTSD (e.g. PE) has not yet been tested in a SCI population. Thus, we aim to conduct the first test of an evidence-based intervention for PTSD among patients with SCI. Adults with SCI and PTSD (N = 60) will be randomly assigned to either: (1) 12-sessions of PE (2-3 sessions per week) or (2) a treatment as usual (TAU) control group who will receive the standard inpatient rehabilitation care for SCI patients. Primary outcomes will be assessed at 0, 6, 10, and 32 weeks.

4.
J Anxiety Disord ; 61: 27-36, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30287083

ABSTRACT

Trials of virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) for anxiety-related disorders have proliferated in number and diversity since our previous meta-analysis that examined 13 total trials, most of which were for specific phobias (Powers & Emmelkamp, 2008). Since then, new trials have compared VRET to more diverse anxiety and related disorders including social anxiety disorder (SAD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and panic disorder (PD) with and without agoraphobia. With the availability of this data, it is imperative to re-examine the efficacy of VRET for anxiety. A literature search for randomized controlled trials of VRET versus control or in vivo exposure yielded 30 studies with 1057 participants. Fourteen studies tested VRET for specific phobias, 8 for SAD or performance anxiety, 5 for PTSD, and 3 for PD. A random effects analysis estimated a large effect size for VRET versus waitlist (g = 0.90) and a medium to large effect size for VRET versus psychological placebo conditions (g = 0.78). A comparison of VRET and in vivo conditions did not show significantly different effect sizes (g = -0.07). These findings were relatively consistent across disorders. A meta-regression analysis revealed that larger sample sizes were associated with lower effect sizes in VRET versus control comparisons (ß = -0.007, p < 0.05). These results indicate that VRET is an effective and equal medium for exposure therapy.


Subject(s)
Anxiety Disorders/therapy , Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy , Agoraphobia/therapy , Anxiety/psychology , Anxiety/therapy , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Humans , Implosive Therapy , Panic Disorder/therapy , Phobia, Social/therapy , Phobic Disorders/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Sample Size , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...