학술논문
Clinical Assessment of Judgment in Adults and the Elderly: Development and Validation of the Three Domains of Judgment Test—Clinical Version (3DJT-CV)
Document Type
Report
Author
Bernard-Arevalo, Simon-Pierre; Laforce, Robert Jr; Khayat, Olivier; Bouchard, Vital; Bruneau, Marie-Andrée; Brunelle, Sarah; Caron, Stéphanie; Chamelian, Laury; Chénard, Marise; Côté, Jean-François; Crépeau-Gendron, Gabrielle; Doré, Marie-Claire; Fortin, Marie-Pierre; Gagnon, Nadine; Gagnon, Pierre R.; Giroux, Chloé; Jean, Léonie; Létourneau, Geneviève; Marceau, Émilie; Moreau, Vincent; Morin, Michèle; Ouellet, Christine; Poulin, Stéphane; Radermaker, Steve; Rousseau, Katerine; Touchette, Catherine; Dumais, Alexandre
Source
Journal of Clinical Medicine. May 2023, Vol. 12 Issue 11
Subject
Language
English
ISSN
2077-0383
Abstract
Author(s): Simon-Pierre Bernard-Arevalo [1,2]; Robert Jr Laforce [2,3]; Olivier Khayat [1,4]; Vital Bouchard [5]; Marie-Andrée Bruneau [4,6]; Sarah Brunelle [4,7]; Stéphanie Caron [2,5]; Laury Chamelian [4,8]; Marise Chénard [2,5]; Jean-François [...]
(1) Background: This article discusses the first two phases of development and validation of the Three Domains of Judgment Test (3DJT). This computer-based tool, co-constructed with users and capable of being administered remotely, aims to assess the three main domains of judgment (practical, moral, and social) and learn from the psychometric weaknesses of tests currently used in clinical practice. (2) Method: First, we presented the 3DJT to experts in cognition, who evaluated the tool as a whole as well as the content validity, relevance, and acceptability of 72 scenarios. Second, an improved version was administered to 70 subjects without cognitive impairment to select scenarios with the best psychometric properties in order to build a future clinically short version of the test. (3) Results: Fifty-six scenarios were retained following expert evaluation. Results support the idea that the improved version has good internal consistency, and the concurrent validity primer shows that 3DJT is a good measure of judgment. Furthermore, the improved version was found to have a significant number of scenarios with good psychometric properties to prepare a clinical version of the test. (4) Conclusion: The 3DJT is an interesting alternative tool for assessing judgment. However, more studies are needed for its implementation in a clinical context.
(1) Background: This article discusses the first two phases of development and validation of the Three Domains of Judgment Test (3DJT). This computer-based tool, co-constructed with users and capable of being administered remotely, aims to assess the three main domains of judgment (practical, moral, and social) and learn from the psychometric weaknesses of tests currently used in clinical practice. (2) Method: First, we presented the 3DJT to experts in cognition, who evaluated the tool as a whole as well as the content validity, relevance, and acceptability of 72 scenarios. Second, an improved version was administered to 70 subjects without cognitive impairment to select scenarios with the best psychometric properties in order to build a future clinically short version of the test. (3) Results: Fifty-six scenarios were retained following expert evaluation. Results support the idea that the improved version has good internal consistency, and the concurrent validity primer shows that 3DJT is a good measure of judgment. Furthermore, the improved version was found to have a significant number of scenarios with good psychometric properties to prepare a clinical version of the test. (4) Conclusion: The 3DJT is an interesting alternative tool for assessing judgment. However, more studies are needed for its implementation in a clinical context.