Outcome Measure Discussion
This assignment is intended to be a discussion and interaction among peers. Please follow APA formatting/structure for all other aspects of the discussion. Peer reviewed journal references are required for your postings and will strengthen your points within the discussion (see rubric).
This discussion question will be “worth” a total of 5 points of your overall grade for this course. Grading will be assigned by the faculty based on the quality and content of your posts; your level of participation in the discussion will be considered in the grading. Students are expected to cross post to at least 2 peers in the discussion. Your cross post should provide a substantial posting that offers new or additional information to what was originally discussed. Including “I agree” or “nice work” comments do not constitute as a substantial cross post and may affect your grade. Outcome Measure Discussion
Discussion Limit: The initial post should be approximately 250 words. The cross post should be approximately 150 words. Expected word counts do not include references.
For this discussion, describe one outcome that is a “latent” variable. These variables are something that you can’t see (pain, quality of life, anxiety, depression, patient satisfaction,
10/31/24, 4:38 AM
Students are expected to cross post to at least 2 peers in the discussion. Your cross post should provide a substantial posting that offers new or additional information to what was originally discussed. ,Including I agree or nice work comments do not constitute as a substantial cross post and may affect your grade.,
Discussion Limit: The initial post should be approximate.y 250 words. The cross post should be approximately 150 words. Expected word counts do not include references.
For this discussion, describe one outcome that is a “latent” variable. These variables are something that you can’t see (pain, quality of life, anxiety, depression, patient satisfaction, healthcare provider trust, etc.) but are extremely important measures of program success. The goal is for you to start thinking about what outcomes could be appropriate to use to evaluate the effectiveness of your program.
This instrument must be something that already exist. The goal is to report the psychometrics validity and reliability of the instrument you have chosen., Please note that sensitivity and specificity is different from reliability and validity., However, sensitivity and specificity together can be considered a test of criterion related validity (for highly sensitive and specific tests). Start by describing the variable and the measure (number of questions, scoring, etc.). Next, describe how the validity and reliability were established. For reliability think test/retest, internal consistency, Cronbach’s alpha, or inter-rater; validity can be construct, content, or one of the criterion related validities. Do not just say that the reliability and sensitivity were good. HINT: there is often a statistical test involved. Report the methods used and the statistical test if available. Describe the populations that were used to establish the psychometric properties. Outcome Measure Discussion
Content
Outcomes Measure Discussion
10/31/24, 4:39 AM
statistical test if available. Describe the populations that were used to establish the psychometric properties.
Content
Outcomes Measure Discussion
Tips for Success
- Review the material in Polit & Beck chapters 9 and 13 about outcome measures.,
- Make sure the selected outcome has an existing measure that has been used in multiplestudies.,
- As you describe the reliability and validity of the measure, include available statistics (seeexample below).,
- For your cross post, include at least 1 reference that was not part of your original post.
Psychometric Property Description
10/31/24, 4:39 AM
- As you describe the reliability and validity of the measure, include available statistics (seeexample below).
- For your cross post, include at least 1 reference that was not part of your original post.
Psychometric Property Description
Below is an example of how to describe the psychometric properties of a measure. In this example, the General Well-being schedule was used as a “substitute” for the concept of depression in a secondary analysis of existing data. When authors do this, they use it as a “proxy” measure of the outcome of interest. This paragraph is from a published article. General Well-being.
The General Well-being schedule (GWBS) was used as a proxy measure for depressive symptoms. The GWBS is a self-administered 18-item scale that was originally developed for the National Center for Health Statistics (McDowell & Newell, 1996). The GWBS has both positive and negative questions that explore the individuals’ feelings of depression, anxiety, general health, self-control, vitality, and positive well-being represented as six subscales. Three levels of well-being are proposed: 0—60, severe distress; 61—72, moderate distress; and 73—110, positive well-being (McDowell & Newell, 1996). Concurrent validity for the total GWBS score was supported by an average correlation of 0.69 with six other depression scales (Fazio, 1977). In a study of 195 college students, the GWBS had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.91 for men and 0.95 for women (Fazio, 1977). In the current study, the GWBS exhibited a strong reliability coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha 0.91). The scale performed equally as well with men (α = 0.90) and women (α = 0.91). Outcome Measure Discussion
Ridner, S.L. (2005). Predicting smoking status among college students. Public Health Nursing, 22(6), 494-505.
