The association of resilience and positive mental health in systemic sclerosis: A Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) cohort cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: A previous study using Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) Cohort data identified five classes of people with systemic sclerosis (also known as scleroderma) based on patient-reported somatic (fatigue, pain, sleep) and mental health (anxiety, depression) symptoms and compared indicators of disease severity between classes. Across four classes ("low", "normal", "high", "very high"), there were progressively worse somatic and mental health outcomes and greater disease severity. The fifth ("high/low") class, however, was characterized by high disease severity, fatigue, pain, and sleep but low mental health symptoms. We evaluated resilience across classes and compared resilience between classes. METHODS: Cross-sectional study. SPIN Cohort participants completed the 10-item Connor-Davidson-Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) and PROMIS v2.0 domains between August 2022 and January 2023. We used latent profile modeling to identify five classes as in the previous study and multiple linear regression to compare resilience levels across classes, controlling for sociodemographic and disease variables. RESULTS: Mean CD-RISC score (N = 1054 participants) was 27.7 (standard deviation = 7.3). Resilience decreased progressively across "low" to "normal" to "high" to "very high" classes (mean 4.7 points per step). Based on multiple regression, the "high/low" class exhibited higher resilience scores than the "high" class (6.0 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.9 to 7.1 points; standardized mean difference = 0.83, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: People with worse disease severity and patient-reported outcomes reported substantially lower resilience, except a class of people with high disease severity, fatigue, pain, and sleep disturbance but positive mental health and high resilience.

Do breaks in online gambling affect neuropsychological arousal? Conceptual approach and lessons learned from the TESSA-pilot trial.

Introduction: Mandatory breaks have been discussed as a harm reduction strategy in the context of gambling for several years, but their effectiveness remains unclear. The TESSA pilot study examines the association of physiological arousal (PA) and mandatory breaks during gambling with an aim to conceptualize the framework for a subsequent randomized controlled trial. Material and methods: In a one-armed experimental pilot study 28 participants engaged in a simulated online slot game with mandatory breaks. PA, disentangled into fear, anger, joy, attraction, balance, and retraction, was continuously monitored via skin conductivity and skin temperature. The occurrence of PA in distinct phases (phase 1: initiation, phase 2: pre-break, phase 3: post-break) was contrasted by multilevel logistic regression. Results: Fear and attraction did not change. Compared to phase 1, anger (OR = 0.698; p = 0.015) and joy (OR = 0.714; p = 0.032) were less likely in phase 2, with joy also being less likely in phase 3 (OR = 0.690; p = 0.023). Balance was more likely in phase 2 (OR = 5.073; p < 0.0001) than in phase 1 and less likely in phase 3 (OR = 0.348; p < 0.0001) whilst retraction declined from phase to phase. Discussion: Mandatory breaks appear suited to offset changes in PA response evolving during gambling, but a sustained effect on initial PA levels should not to be expected. However, to sensitively judge the role of breaks additional framework conditions that impact on gambling behavior (e. g. wins/losses) should be considered.

Validity, Reliability, and Differential Item Functioning of English and French Versions of the 10-Item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale in Systemic Sclerosis: A Scleroderma Patient-Centered Intervention Network Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Some individuals with systemic sclerosis (SSc) report positive mental health, despite severe disease manifestations, which may be associated with resilience, but no resilience measure has been validated in SSc. This study was undertaken to assess the validity, reliability, and differential item functioning (DIF) between English- and French-language versions of the 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10) in SSc. METHODS: Eligible participants were enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Cohort and completed the CD-RISC-10 between August 2022 and January 2023. We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to evaluate the CD-RISC-10 factor structure and conducted DIF analysis across languages with Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes models. We tested convergent validity with another measure of resilience and measures of self-esteem and depression and anxiety symptoms. We assessed internal consistency and test-retest reliability using Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: A total of 962 participants were included in this analysis. CFA supported a single-factor structure (Tucker-Lewis index = 0.99, comparative fit index = 0.99, root mean square error of approximation = 0.08 [90% confidence interval (90% CI) 0.07, 0.09]). We found no meaningful DIF. Internal consistency was high (α = 0.93 [95% CI 0.92, 0.94]), and we found that correlations with other measures of psychological functioning were moderate to large (|r| = 0.57-0.78) and confirmed study hypotheses. The scale showed good 1-2-week test-retest reliability (ICC 0.80 [95% CI 0.75, 0.85]) in a subsample of 230 participants. CONCLUSION: The CD-RISC-10 is a valid and reliable measure of resilience in SSc, with score comparability across English and French versions.

Transparency and completeness of reporting of depression screening tool accuracy studies: A meta-research review of adherence to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies statement.

OBJECTIVES: Accurate and complete study reporting allows evidence users to critically appraise studies, evaluate possible bias, and assess generalizability and applicability. We evaluated the extent to which recent studies on depression screening accuracy were reported consistent with Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement requirements. METHODS: MEDLINE was searched from January 1, 2018 through May 21, 2021 for depression screening accuracy studies. RESULTS: 106 studies were included. Of 34 STARD items or sub-items, the number of adequately reported items per study ranged from 7 to 18 (mean = 11.5, standard deviation [SD] = 2.5; median = 11.5), and the number inadequately reported ranged from 3 to 17 (mean = 10.1, SD = 2.5; median = 10.0). There were eight items adequately reported, seven partially reported, 11 inadequately reported, and four not applicable in ≥50% of studies; the remaining four items had mixed reporting. Items inadequately reported in ≥70% of studies related to the rationale for index test cut-offs examined, missing data management, analyses of variability in accuracy results, sample size determination, participant flow, study registration, and study protocol. CONCLUSION: Recently published depression screening accuracy studies are not optimally reported. Journals should endorse and implement STARD adherence.

Sample size and precision of estimates in studies of depression screening tool accuracy: A meta-research review of studies published in 2018-2021.

OBJECTIVES: Depression screening tool accuracy studies should be conducted with large enough sample sizes to generate precise accuracy estimates. We assessed the proportion of recently published depression screening tool diagnostic accuracy studies that reported sample size calculations; the proportion that provided confidence intervals (CIs); and precision, based on the width and lower bounds of 95% CIs for sensitivity and specificity. In addition, we assessed whether these results have improved since a previous review of studies published in 2013-2015. METHODS: MEDLINE was searched from January 1, 2018, through May 21, 2021. RESULTS: Twelve of 106 primary studies (11%) described a viable sample size calculation, which represented an improvement of 8% since the last review. Thirty-six studies (34%) provided reasonably accurate CIs. Of 103 studies where 95% CIs were provided or could be calculated, seven (7%) had sensitivity CI widths of ≤10%, whereas 58 (56%) had widths of ≥21%. Eighty-four studies (82%) had lower bounds of CIs <80% for sensitivity and 77 studies (75%) for specificity. These results were similar to those reported previously. CONCLUSION: Few studies reported sample size calculations, and the number of included individuals in most studies was too small to generate reasonably precise accuracy estimates.