Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to validate a new scale for assessing habitual behavior-the Daily Habit Scale in patients with Parkinson's disease.BackgroundParkinson's disease patients are impaired in habit learning and skill acquisition. Despite repeated practice, they have difficulty developing habitual responses.MethodsOne hundred seventy-nine patients (Median (Mdn) = 69 [64-76], 65 females) participated in the study. Corrected item-to-total correlations were calculated to assess the item-convergent and item discriminant validity. Confirmatory factor analysis and assessment of internal consistency were also carried out. Concurrent validity in respect to measures of anxiety and depression, apathy, impulsivity, personality, multidimensional health locus of control, and health-related quality of life was also calculated. To determine the test-retest reliability of the scale, 30 patients (Mdn = 69 [66-73], 9 females) completed a second copy of the scale 6 months after the first.ResultsTwenty-nine items (76%) and 9 items (24%) of the 38-item scale, respectively, showed a very good and good convergent validity. All the items discriminated between their own factor and the other factors. The comparative fit index of 0.932 indicated an acceptable model fit of the data, whereas the root mean square error of approximation of 0.06 moderate model fit. The scale had a good internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.792), and a moderate test-retest reliability (0.57). Females had higher scores on two factors compared to men (Factor 3: household activities and Factor 8: sleep-related activities).ConclusionsThe Daily Habit Scale is a reliable and valid tool to measure daily habits in Parkinson's disease.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.