Cargando…
Validity, Reliability, and the Questionable Role of Psychometrics in Plastic Surgery
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 abil...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174233/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25289354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000103 |
_version_ | 1782336331140038656 |
---|---|
author | Swanson, Eric |
author_facet | Swanson, Eric |
author_sort | Swanson, Eric |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4174233 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41742332014-10-06 Validity, Reliability, and the Questionable Role of Psychometrics in Plastic Surgery Swanson, Eric Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Special Topics 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. Wolters Kluwer Health 2014-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4174233/ /pubmed/25289354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000103 Text en Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. PRS Global Open is a publication of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially. |
spellingShingle | Special Topics Swanson, Eric Validity, Reliability, and the Questionable Role of Psychometrics in Plastic Surgery |
title | Validity, Reliability, and the Questionable Role of Psychometrics in Plastic Surgery |
title_full | Validity, Reliability, and the Questionable Role of Psychometrics in Plastic Surgery |
title_fullStr | Validity, Reliability, and the Questionable Role of Psychometrics in Plastic Surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | Validity, Reliability, and the Questionable Role of Psychometrics in Plastic Surgery |
title_short | Validity, Reliability, and the Questionable Role of Psychometrics in Plastic Surgery |
title_sort | validity, reliability, and the questionable role of psychometrics in plastic surgery |
topic | Special Topics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174233/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25289354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000103 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT swansoneric validityreliabilityandthequestionableroleofpsychometricsinplasticsurgery |