Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
This study evaluated the psychometric properties of retrospective reports of childhood sexual and physical abuse by comparing two assessment formats, interview and questionnaire, and looking at both the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability over 2 years. Nonclinical participants completed the Family Experiences Interview (FEI; Ogata et al., 1990) and the Family Experiences Questionnaire (FEQ; Wheelock, Lohr, & Silk, 1997) at age 18 and the FEQ again at age 20. Both assessments evaluate individuals for sexual and physical abuse before age 18, and the two have similar formats and wording. There were no significant differences in the reported frequency of childhood abuse on the interview versus on the questionnaire when given at the same point in time, and the agreement between the two measures was high. The test-retest reliability in childhood abuse reports was moderate. Taken together, these results suggest that interview and questionnaire reports of childhood abuse are roughly equivalent.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/pedi.18.2.178.32778 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!