Literature DB >> 25289354

Validity, reliability, and the questionable role of psychometrics in plastic surgery.

Eric Swanson1.   

Abstract

SUMMARY: This report examines the meaning of validity and reliability and the role of psychometrics in plastic surgery. Study titles increasingly include the word "valid" to support the authors' claims. Studies by other investigators may be labeled "not validated." Validity simply refers to the ability of a device to measure what it intends to measure. Validity is not an intrinsic test property. It is a relative term most credibly assigned by the independent user. Similarly, the word "reliable" is subject to interpretation. In psychometrics, its meaning is synonymous with "reproducible." The definitions of valid and reliable are analogous to accuracy and precision. Reliability (both the reliability of the data and the consistency of measurements) is a prerequisite for validity. Outcome measures in plastic surgery are intended to be surveys, not tests. The role of psychometric modeling in plastic surgery is unclear, and this discipline introduces difficult jargon that can discourage investigators. Standard statistical tests suffice. The unambiguous term "reproducible" is preferred when discussing data consistency. Study design and methodology are essential considerations when assessing a study's validity.

Entities:  

Year:  2014        PMID: 25289354      PMCID: PMC4174233          DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000103

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open        ISSN: 2169-7574


  23 in total

1.  The BREAST-Q: further validation in independent clinical samples.

Authors:  Stefan J Cano; Anne F Klassen; Amie M Scott; Peter G Cordeiro; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.730

2.  Development and validation of a novel scar evaluation scale.

Authors:  Adam J Singer; Blavantray Arora; Alexander Dagum; Sharon Valentine; Judd E Hollander
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.730

3.  Randomized controlled trial comparing health-related quality of life in patients undergoing vertical scar versus inverted T-shaped reduction mammaplasty.

Authors:  Eric Swanson
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.730

4.  Validation of a four-point photographic scale for the assessment of midface volume loss and/or contour deficiency.

Authors:  Z Paul Lorenc; David Bank; Michael Kane; Xiaoming Lin; Stacy Smith
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  The patient-reported impact of scars measure: development and validation.

Authors:  Benjamin C Brown; Stephen P McKenna; Mattea Solomon; Jeanette Wilburn; Duncan A McGrouther; Ardeshir Bayat
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 4.730

6.  Development and validation of a new clinically-meaningful rating scale for measuring lateral canthal line severity.

Authors:  Michael A Kane; Andrew Blitzer; Fredric S Brandt; Richard G Glogau; Gary D Monheit; Rhoda S Narins; Jean A Paty; Jacob M Waugh
Journal:  Aesthet Surg J       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.283

7.  Prospective outcome study of 225 cases of breast augmentation.

Authors:  Eric Swanson
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.730

8.  Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q.

Authors:  Andrea L Pusic; Anne F Klassen; Amie M Scott; Jennifer A Klok; Peter G Cordeiro; Stefan J Cano
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 4.730

9.  Measuring outcomes that matter to face-lift patients: development and validation of FACE-Q appearance appraisal scales and adverse effects checklist for the lower face and neck.

Authors:  Anne F Klassen; Stefan J Cano; Amie M Scott; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.730

10.  Validation of the Turkish version of the Breast Reduction Assessed Severity Scale.

Authors:  Yavuz Kececi; Emin Sir; Baha Zengel
Journal:  Aesthet Surg J       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 4.283

View more
  5 in total

1.  Reply to the letter 'Linguistic validation of the "FACE-Q Rhinoplasty Module" in Italian'.

Authors:  Olcay Cem Bulut
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Outcome studies in plastic surgery: knowing the objectives and avoiding pitfalls.

Authors:  Eric Swanson
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2015-01-08

3.  Psychometrics: Essential for Valid, Reliable, and Responsive Measurement in the Development of Patient-reported Outcome Instruments in Plastic Surgery.

Authors:  Vivek Panchapakesan; Toni Zhong; Christopher R Forrest; Andrea L Pusic; Achilles Thoma
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2015-01-08

4.  Reply: the limitations of psychometric outcome studies in plastic surgery.

Authors:  Eric Swanson
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2015-01-08

5.  Statistical Basic Steps to Be Considered on Planning a Research.

Authors:  Cristina Pires Camargo; Rolf Gemperli
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2018-04-12
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.