Search

Research into nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) has primarily focussed on the experience and regulation of emotion. Recently, NSSI-specific cognitions, including self-efficacy to resist self-injury, have been explored to further understand the behaviour. However, within these studies self-efficacy to resist NSSI has been assessed broadly using an adapted measure of self-efficacy to avoid suicide. There is a need for a NSSI-specific measure of self-efficacy, which considers specific contexts that may influence confidence in the ability to resist self-injuring. This paper reports the development of such a measure. An initial item pool (125 items) was generated from interviews with people with lived experience of NSSI and experts in the field of self-injury. These items were then administered to 650 participants aged 18–40 years (M = 21.14, SD = 2.32, 45.69% with a history of NSSI). Analyses revealed a three-factor structure representing: contexts in which it would be difficult to resist NSSI (risk contexts); contexts which make it easier to resist NSSI (protective contexts); and contexts in which people are reminded of self-injury (reminders of NSSI). To reduce the number of items, eight items with the highest loadings on each factor were retained. The final 24 item (three subscales) scale fit the data well and demonstrated invariance across individuals with and without a history of self-injury. Correlations with related but distinct constructs (e.g., self-esteem, locus of control) supported convergent and discriminative validity. This measure could be used to further theoretical understanding of NSSI and may be useful in clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While there has been increasing interest in promoting father engagement in parenting interventions for child wellbeing, both research and practice endeavors have been hindered by a lack of a measure of father engagement practices. This paper reports the development and evaluation of a comprehensive, practitioner-report measure of father engagement practices-—the Father Engagement Questionnaire (FEQ). Practitioners (N = 589; 84.5% females; mean age = 38.56) involved in delivering parenting interventions in Australia completed the FEQ, along with background demographics and questions regarding their own and organization’s practice. A separate sample of 28 practitioners completed the FEQ twice, with a two-week interim, to assess test-retest stability of the measure. Exploratory factor analysis revealed five factors corresponding to the measure’s five intended content areas: Confidence in Working with Fathers, Competence in Using Engagement Strategies, Perceived Effectiveness of Engagement Strategies, Frequency of Strategy Use, and Organizational Practices for Father Engagement. Each of these scales demonstrated adequate internal consistency reliability and test-retest stability. As the five scales appear to be related but distinct, it is recommended that the FEQ is used as a multidimensional measure of father engagement. In terms of predictive validity, higher scores on the Confidence in Working with Fathers, Frequency of Strategy Use, and Organizational Practices for Father Engagement scales were associated with a higher likelihood of practitioner-reported father attendance. The results provide support for adequate psychometric properties of the FEQ as a research and clinical tool for assessing and monitoring father engagement practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Different health state utility (HSU) instruments produce different utilities for the same individuals, thereby compromising the intended comparability of economic evaluations of health care interventions. When developing crosswalks, previous studies have indicated nonlinear relationships. This paper inquires into the degree of nonlinearity across the four most widely used HSU-instruments and proposes exchange rates that differ depending on the severity levels of the health state utility scale.Methods: Overall, 7933 respondents from six countries, 1760 in a non-diagnosed healthy group and 6173 in seven disease groups, reported their health states using four different instruments: EQ-5D-5L, SF-6D, HUI-3 and 15D. Quantile regressions investigate the degree of nonlinear relationships between these instruments. To compare the instruments across different disease severities, we split the health state utility scale into utility intervals with 0.2 successive decrements in utility starting from perfect health at 1.00. Exchange rates (ERs) are calculated as the mean utility difference between two utility intervals on one HSU-instrument divided by the difference in mean utility on another HSU-instrument.Results: Quantile regressions reveal significant nonlinear relationships across all four HSU-instruments. The degrees of nonlinearities differ, with a maximum degree of difference in the coefficients along the health state utility scale of 3.34 when SF-6D is regressed on EQ-5D. At the lower end of the health state utility scale, the exchange rate from SF-6D to EQ-5D is 2.11, whilst at the upper end it is 0.38.Conclusion: Comparisons at different utility levels illustrate the fallacy of using linear functions as crosswalks between HSU-instruments. The existence of nonlinear relationships between different HSU-instruments suggests that level-specific exchange rates should be used when converting a change in utility on the instrument used, onto a corresponding utility change had another instrument been used. Accounting for nonlinearities will increase the validity of the comparison for decision makers when faced with a choice between interventions whose calculations of QALY gains have been based on different HSU-instruments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is consensus in the partner abuse prevention education literature that a skills-focus is needed. However, appropriate instruments for evaluating the effectiveness of skills-focused programs do not exist. Against this background, and based on the dyadic slippery slope model of partner abuse, the Tendency to Resist or End Abusive Dynamics (TREAD) scale was developed. TREAD is defined as one's tendency to respond assertively or protectively in situations involving warning-sign (potentially hurtful or controlling) behaviors by a partner. The scale's development drew on the input of three Australian samples: mixed-gender adolescent focus groups, 426 young female respondents to an online survey, and 152 adolescent girls participating in a school-based program trial. When tested with the 152 adolescent girls, the TREAD scale had acceptable internal consistency and high inter-rater reliability. Principal components analysis identified three interrelated TREAD subscales (i.e., Conflict-Retaliation TREAD, Denigration TREAD, and Dominance-Possessiveness TREAD) all of which were negatively associated with frequency of exposure to warning-sign behaviors. This paper charts the preliminary development of the TREAD scale, presenting evidence supporting its validity as a change-target for partner abuse prevention education with adolescent girls and, potentially, boys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]