Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
3.5
2.4
Journals
Healthcare
Special Issues
Evidence-Based Practice in Occupational Health: Development and Adaptation of Psychometric...
share announcement

Evidence-Based Practice in Occupational Health: Development and Adaptation of Psychometric Instruments

A special issue of Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032). This special issue belongs to the section "Health Assessments".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 October 2025 | Viewed by 1729

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Tamara Melnik

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Paulista School of Medicine, Federal University of São Paulo, Sao Paulo 04023-062, Brazil
Interests: evidence-based practice in psychology; systematic reviews
Dr. Jorge Sinval

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637616, Singapore
Interests: psychometrics; bayesian structural equation modeling; evidence-based health; systematic reviews; occupational health; organizational psychology; international large-scale assessments; burnout

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

In the field of occupational health, the effective evaluation of psychosocial and environmental factors is crucial for improving worker well-being and productivity. Evidence-based practice in this area relies heavily on the use of psychometric instruments with robust validity evidence. However, developing and adapting these tools to different cultural and workplace contexts presents significant challenges. Accurate and culturally sensitive instruments can inform better occupational health interventions, policies, and research.

We are pleased to invite you to contribute to our Special Issue titled “Evidence-Based Practice in Occupational Health: Development and Adaptation of Psychometric Instruments”. We are particularly interested in instruments that are psychometrically sound and provide strong validity evidence, ideally from different sources. Practitioners and researchers can thereby guide their activities with measurement tools that provide evidence and theory supporting the interpretation of test scores for their proposed uses.

This Special Issue aims to collect original research articles and comprehensive reviews that address the development and adaptation of psychometric instruments specifically within the context of occupational health. By focusing on validity evidence and the methodological rigor required for instrument adaptation and development, this Special Issue seeks to enhance the tools available to occupational health professionals, aiding in precise and contextual diagnoses and interventions. In this Special Issue, we welcome a range of articles including, but not limited to:

  • Studies on the development of new psychometric instruments tailored to occupational health.
  • Studies that provide validity evidence of existing instruments in different cultural contexts.
  • Comparative research on various psychometric tools assessing similar constructs.
  • Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the application and effectiveness of psychometric instruments in occupational health.
  • Cross-sectional studies focused on the cultural adaptation and standardization of assessment instruments.

We look forward to receiving your valuable contributions.

Dr. Tamara Melnik
Dr. Jorge Sinval
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Healthcare is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2700 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • psychometrics
  • occupational health
  • validity evidence
  • instruments adaptation
  • instruments development
  • evidence-based practice

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

12 pages, 466 KiB  
Article
Confirmatory Factor Analysis Supports the Two-Factor Structure of the Arabic Fear-Avoidance Belief Questionnaire in Patients with Low Back Pain
by Ali H. Alnahdi, Mishal M. Aldaihan and Abdulrahman M. Alsubiheen
Healthcare 2025, 13(7), 800; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13070800 - 2 Apr 2025
Viewed by 262
Abstract
Background/Objective: Inconsistencies exist regarding the exact multidimensional structure underlying the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), with no prior study examining the internal structure of the Arabic FABQ. This study aimed to examine validity evidence of the Arabic FABQ in patients with low back pain [...] Read more.
Background/Objective: Inconsistencies exist regarding the exact multidimensional structure underlying the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), with no prior study examining the internal structure of the Arabic FABQ. This study aimed to examine validity evidence of the Arabic FABQ in patients with low back pain (LBP), based on two sources: validity evidence based on the internal structure (dimensionality and reliability) and validity evidence based on relations with other variables (i.e., pain intensity and disability). Methods: Participants (N = 112) with LBP were recruited from physical therapy clinics. Data were collected through the completion of FABQ and other measures of pain and disability. CFA was performed using a diagonally weighted least squares estimation. The fit of the two-factor model recommended by the original scale developer was assessed using multiple fit indices. Reliability of FABQ subscale scores was assessed using McDonald’s omega (ω) and Average Variance Extracted (AVE). Results: One hundred and twelve patients with LBP with mostly chronic complaints participated in the study. The CFA supported the two-factor model with modifications to account for residual correlations between items 4–5 and 6–7, yielding improved fit indices (χ2(41) = 77.82; p < 0.001; TLI = 0.98, CFI = 0.99, RMSEA = 0.09 (90% CI = 0.06–0.12), and SRMR = 0.08). All factor loadings were salient and significant with values ranging from 0.43 to 0.96. The two underlying factors reflecting physical activity-related and work-related fear avoidance beliefs showed a significant positive correlation of 0.58. These findings confirm the hypothesized dimensionality of the Arabic FABQ. The FABQ work subscale scores demonstrated higher reliability (ω = 0.86; AVE = 0.54) compared to the physical activity subscale scores (ω = 0.63; AVE = 0.44), with both factors measuring related but distinct constructs. The latent scores for the FABQ related to physical activity demonstrated stronger positive correlations with pain intensity (r = 0.37; p < 0.001) and disability (r = 0.43; p < 0.001), compared to the latent scores for work-related FABQ, which showed weaker correlations with pain intensity (r = 0.22; p < 0.001) and disability (r = 0.26; p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study provides evidence to support the two-factor structure of the Arabic FABQ and the common scoring method for the FABQ and facilitates the interpretation of the FABQ subscale scores as reflecting related but distinct domains of fear avoidance beliefs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evidence-Based Practice in Occupational Health: Development and Adaptation of Psychometric Instruments)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 308 KiB  
Article
Knowledge and Use of Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology in the Clinical Practice of Brazilian Psychologists: A Cross-Sectional Study
by Tamara Melnik, Jorge Sinval, Vanessa Dordron de Pinho, José Antônio Spencer Hartmann Junior, Margareth da Silva Oliveira and Fernanda Machado Lopes
Healthcare 2025, 13(4), 431; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13040431 - 17 Feb 2025
Viewed by 872
Abstract
Background/Objectives: The use of scientific evidence for the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders is crucial for achieving optimal clinical outcomes and providing high-quality care. This study investigates the knowledge, sources of evidence, and attitudes of Brazilian clinical psychologists regarding evidence-based practice [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: The use of scientific evidence for the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders is crucial for achieving optimal clinical outcomes and providing high-quality care. This study investigates the knowledge, sources of evidence, and attitudes of Brazilian clinical psychologists regarding evidence-based practice in psychology (EBPP) and discusses barriers to its implementation. Methods: A total of 696 Brazilian clinical psychologists participated in an online questionnaire designed to assess their understanding of EBPP, their familiarity with scientific platforms/databases, and their professional development investments. Latent class analysis (LCA) was conducted, which can be used to identify subgroups of psychologists with similar patterns of professional and training characteristics. Results: The results indicate that while psychologists recognized the importance of EBPP for effective patient care, there was a significant gap in understanding its fundamental principles and concepts. Many participants reported the limited use of scientific databases, missing opportunities to access the latest research advancements. A lower percentage of psychologists consistently implemented EBPP in their clinical practice, highlighting a gap between knowledge and application. Four latent classes emerged from the LCA: I—experienced/established professional psychologist; II—academic psychologist; III—supervised traditional psychologist; and IV—young professional psychologist. Conclusions: This study emphasizes the need for better integration of EBPP into psychology curricula and continuing education programs. Enhancing clinical psychologists’ understanding and proficiency in EBPP can promote evidence-based decision-making and improve the quality of mental health care in Brazil. Efforts should be made to familiarize psychologists with reliable scientific databases, equip them with skills to critically appraise research, and foster a culture of lifelong learning and professional development. Additionally, it is essential to develop strategies tailored to the distinct profiles of professionals identified in this study, considering their training sources, reference usage, and knowledge of EBPP. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Evidence-Based Practice in Occupational Health: Development and Adaptation of Psychometric Instruments)
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-2
Back to TopTop