Qiqing Mo1, Liang Zhou2, Qiuping He3, Cunxian Jia4, Zhenyu Ma1. 1. Department of Social Medicine, School of Public Health, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China. 2. Department of Social Psychiatry, The Affiliated Brain Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University (Guangzhou Huiai Hospital), Guangzhou, China. 3. Department of Health Education and Information, Nanning Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Nanning, China. 4. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Abstract
AIM: The present study aimed to evaluate the validity of proxy informants' reports on Life Event Scale for the Elderly (LESE) by using psychological autopsy method among rural older adults in China. METHODS: A multistage stratified cluster sampling method was used to select research sites. Using a case-control psychological autopsy study, face-to-face interviews were carried out to collect information from 242 suicide cases and 242 living controls. We compared the intensity and number of life events to assess the validity and reliability of LESE with proxy data reported by different informants. Data from proxy respondents of the living controls were compared with data reported by the targets (gold standards). Intraclass correlation coefficients were computed to evaluate the consistency of informants. Spearman's correlation analysis was used to analyze the convergent validity and discriminate validity of the LESE. RESULTS: The number of life events between different informants showed higher intraclass correlation coefficients values than the intensity of life events, but the results of correlation analysis was similar. The LESE was positively correlated with depression, loneliness and hopelessness, and negatively correlated with quality of life, family function and social support both in suicide cases and living controls. CONCLUSIONS: The LESE has good convergent validity and discriminant validity. LESE is a valid instrument for measuring life events in psychological autopsy studies. We suggest using the number of life events to assess the validity and reliability with proxy data in a psychological autopsy study, which is more reliable than using the intensity of life events. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2019; 19: 547-551.
AIM: The present study aimed to evaluate the validity of proxy informants' reports on Life Event Scale for the Elderly (LESE) by using psychological autopsy method among rural older adults in China. METHODS: A multistage stratified cluster sampling method was used to select research sites. Using a case-control psychological autopsy study, face-to-face interviews were carried out to collect information from 242 suicide cases and 242 living controls. We compared the intensity and number of life events to assess the validity and reliability of LESE with proxy data reported by different informants. Data from proxy respondents of the living controls were compared with data reported by the targets (gold standards). Intraclass correlation coefficients were computed to evaluate the consistency of informants. Spearman's correlation analysis was used to analyze the convergent validity and discriminate validity of the LESE. RESULTS: The number of life events between different informants showed higher intraclass correlation coefficients values than the intensity of life events, but the results of correlation analysis was similar. The LESE was positively correlated with depression, loneliness and hopelessness, and negatively correlated with quality of life, family function and social support both in suicide cases and living controls. CONCLUSIONS: The LESE has good convergent validity and discriminant validity. LESE is a valid instrument for measuring life events in psychological autopsy studies. We suggest using the number of life events to assess the validity and reliability with proxy data in a psychological autopsy study, which is more reliable than using the intensity of life events. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2019; 19: 547-551.
Authors: E Arensman; C Larkin; J McCarthy; S Leitao; P Corcoran; E Williamson; C McAuliffe; I J Perry; E Griffin; E M Cassidy; C Bradley; N Kapur; J Kinahan; A Cleary; T Foster; J Gallagher; K Malone; A P Ramos Costa; B A Greiner Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2019-09-06 Impact factor: 3.630