Background Internet psychology services are rapidly increasing and that implies online assessment. To guarantee the results of these new online evaluation procedures, it is necessary to have reliable and valid assessment tools.Objective In this work we analyzed the online versions of two popular psychopathology screening questionnaires: the General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28) and the Symptoms Check-List-90-Revised (SCL-90-R).Methods A total of 185 psychology students were recruited from two universities in Madrid, Spain. All of them had Internet access at home. A test-retest situation and factorial analysis were used to generate reliability and validity data. Both paper-and-pencil questionnaires (test) and their online versions (retest) were completed by 100 participants (median gap = 17 days).Results Results suggest that both online questionnaires were fairly equivalent to their paper-and-pencil versions, with higher reliability values for the SCL-90-R. Factorial analysis tended to reproduce the structure shown in former investigations of both questionnaires, replicating the four-factor structure of the GHQ-28 but failing to do so with the nine-factor structure of the SCL-90-R. Instead, a large unrotated factor appeared.Conclusions Further research should be carried out to confirm these data, but our work supports the online use of both assessment tools. The psychometric properties of the online version of GHQ-28 is similar to the paper-and-pencil and we can recommend its utilization in a Web environment. In contrast, SCL-90-R can only be recommended as a global index for psychological distress, using the Global Severity Index (GSI), not necessarily its subscales; and it should be considered that the online scores were lower than the ones with the paper-and-pencil version.
Our results show that intraperitoneal administration of vitamin E just before closing the laparotomy was effective for reducing adhesion formation. By contrast, the same effect was not achieved after intramuscular administration.
This study compares the effect of an acceptance-based protocol (ACT) and a cognitive control-based (CONT) protocol on three measures of pain coping: tolerance, self-report, and believability. Specific methodological controls were employed to further isolate the role of the value of participating in a pain task, compared to previous investigations on the alteration of the function of aversive stimulation. Twenty participants were randomly assigned to one of the conditions (ACT vs. CONT), and a pre-post design was used. In the ACT condition, the protocol established a relation of coordination between the pain-related thoughts and the actions in the valued direction. In the CONT condition, the protocol established a relation of opposition between the same aspects. Results show an increase in pain tolerance and a reduction of self-reported pain at posttest for both conditions. However, ACT participants showed significantly lower believability of pain than did CONT participants. Conceptual and clinical implications are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.