Search

Background: Whereas the Eysenck Neuroticism Scale only contains items covering negative mental health to measure dysthymia, the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI) contains neuroticism items covering both negative mental health and positive mental health (or euthymia). The consequence of wording items both positively and negatively within the NEO-PI has never been psychometrically investigated. The aim of this study was to perform a validation analysis of the NEO-PI neuroticism scale., Methods: Using a Norwegian general population study we examined the structure of the negatively and positively formulated items by principal component analysis (PCA). The scalability of the identified two groups of euthymia versus dysthymia items was examined by Mokken analysis., Results: With a response rate of 90%, 1082 individuals with a completed NEO-PI were available. The PCA identified the neuroticism scale as the most distinct where 14 items had acceptable loadings for the euthymia subscale, another 14 items for the dysthymia subscale. However, the Mokken analysis coefficient of homogeneity only found acceptable scalability for the euthymia subscale., Limitations: A comparison with the Eysenck Neuroticism Scale was not performed., Conclusion: The NEO-PI neuroticism scale contains two subscales consisting of items worded in an opposite direction where only the positive euthymia items have an acceptable scalability., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bacterial translocation (BT) may cause infections, in particular, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP). In the absence of overt infection, BT may further stimulate the immune system and contribute to haemodynamic alterations and complications. Bacterial DNA (bDNA) is claimed to be a promising surrogate marker for BT, although its clinical relevance has been questioned., Materials and Methods: In 38 cirrhotic patients with and without SBP, bDNA in blood and ascites were assessed by 16S rDNA quantitative PCR. Levels of lipopolysaccharide-binding protein in plasma and highly sensitive C-reactive protein, tumour necrosis factor-α, soluble urokinase plasminogen activating receptor, interleukin-6, interleukin 8, interferon-γ inducible protein-10 and vascular endothelial growth factor in plasma and ascites were measured by multiplex cytokine and ELISA assays., Results: In patients without signs of SBP or positive cultures, we found a high frequency of bDNA but low concordance of bDNA between blood and ascites. Markers of inflammation were not significantly different between blood bDNA-positive (22%), ascites bDNA-positive (52%), and bDNA-negative patients. The 16S rDNA PCR failed to show bDNA in two out of six samples with SBP. Sequencing of positive samples did not determine the source of bDNA., Conclusion: bDNA as assessed by this PCR method was largely unrelated to markers of inflammation and does not seem to be of clinical value in the diagnosis of SBP. According to our results, bDNA is not a reliable marker of BT.