000134872 001__ 134872
000134872 005__ 20251113150203.0
000134872 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/j.sjpmh.2023.10.003
000134872 0248_ $$2sideral$$a138325
000134872 037__ $$aART-2023-138325
000134872 041__ $$aeng
000134872 100__ $$aSanz-Gómez, Sergio
000134872 245__ $$aReliability and validity of proxy reports of impulsivity and aggression: An evidence-based assessment approach to psychological autopsy methods
000134872 260__ $$c2023
000134872 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000134872 5203_ $$aIntroduction: Psychological autopsy methods often include measures of impulsivity and aggression. The aim is to assess their reliability and validity in a Spanish sample. Methods: Cross-sectional web-based survey was fulfilled by 184 proband and proxy pairs. Data was collected on sociodemographic characteristics, impulsivity through Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11), aggression through Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BPAQ), and history of suicide ideation. Proxies filled out BIS-11, BPAQ and suicide ideation with the responses they would expect from the probands. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) between proband and proxies. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the predictive validity of proxy reports in predicting probands’ suicide ideation. Results: Bivariate analysis showed differences in BPAQ (Median 68 vs. 62; p = 0.001), but not in BIS-11 (p > .050). BIS-11 showed good concordance (ICC = 0.754; CI 95% 0.671–0.816) and BPAQ acceptable (ICC = 0.592; CI 95% 0.442–0.699). In the probands regression model BPAQ predicted suicide ideation (OR 1.038; CI 95% 1.016–1.061) but not BIS-11 (OR 0.991; CI 95% 0.958–1.025). In the proxy-report model BPAQ also predicted probands’ suicide ideation (OR 1.036; CI 95% 1.014–1.058) but not BIS-11 (OR 0.973; CI 95% 0.942–1.004). Conclusion: Used as proxy-reported assessment tools, BIS-11 showed better reliability than the BPAQ. However, both showed validity in Spanish population and could be included in psychological autopsy protocols.
000134872 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby-nc-nd$$uhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es
000134872 590__ $$a0.0$$b2023
000134872 591__ $$aPSYCHIATRY
000134872 591__ $$aPSYCHIATRY
000134872 594__ $$a9.5$$b2023
000134872 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
000134872 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-0633-2810$$aAlacreu-Crespo, Adrián$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000134872 700__ $$aGuija, Julio Antonio
000134872 700__ $$aGiner, Lucas
000134872 7102_ $$14009$$2680$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Psicología y Sociología$$cÁrea Person.Eval.Trat.Psicoló.
000134872 773__ $$g18, 1 (2023), 28-33$$pSpan. j. psychiatr. ment. health$$tSpanish journal of psychiatry and mental health$$x2950-2861
000134872 8564_ $$s818230$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/134872/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada
000134872 8564_ $$s2905026$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/134872/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada
000134872 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:134872$$particulos$$pdriver
000134872 951__ $$a2025-11-13-15:00:45
000134872 980__ $$aARTICLE