Establishing dimensionality of sexual behaviours in patients with regional brain dysfunction

References

• Hibbard MR, Gordon WA, Flanagan S, Haddad L, Labinsky E. Sexual dysfunction after traumatic brain injury. NeuroRehabilitation. 2000;15(2):107–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson C, Knight C, Alderman N. Challenges associated with the definition and assessment of inappropriate sexual behaviour amongst individuals with an acquired neurological impairment. Brain Inj. 2006;20(7):687–93. doi:10.1080/02699050600744137.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing MG, Stolwyk R, Ponsford JL. Sexual changes in individuals with traumatic brain injury: a control comparison. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2013;28(3):171–78. doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e31828b4f63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendez MF, Shapira JS. Hypersexual behavior in frontotemporal dementia: a comparison with early-onset Alzheimer’s disease. Arch Sex Behav. 2013;42(3):501–09. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-0042-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ponsford JL. Sexual changes associated with traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2003;13(1–2):275–89. doi:10.1080/09602010244000363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolwyk RJ, Downing MG, Taffe J, Kreutzer JS, Zasler ND, Ponsford JL. Assessment of sexuality following traumatic brain injury: validation of the Brain Injury Questionnaire of Sexuality. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2013;28(3):164–70. doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e31828197d1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson GK, Sabaz M, Daher M. Prevalence, clinical features, and correlates of inappropriate sexual behaviour after traumatic brain injury: a multicenter study. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2013;28(3):164–70. doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e31828197d1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns A, Jacoby R, Levy R. Psychiatric phenomena in Alzheimer’s disease. IV: disorders of behaviour. Br J Psychiatry. 1990;157(1):86–94. doi:10.1192/bjp.157.1.86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai SJ, Hwang JP, Yang CH, Liu KM, Lirng JF. Inappropriate sexual behaviours in dementia: a preliminary report. Alzheimer Dis Associated Disord. 1999;13(1):60–62. doi:10.1097/00002093-199903000-00009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black B, Muralee S, Tampi RR. Inappropriate sexual behaviours in dementia. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2005;18(3):155–62. doi:10.1177/0891988705277541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Medeiros K, Rosenberg PB, Baker AS, Onyike CU. Improper sexual behaviours in elders with dementia living in residential care. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2008;26(4):370–77. doi:10.1159/000163219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill CJ, Sander AM, Robins N, Mazzei D, Struchen MA. Exploring experiences of intimacy from the viewpoint of individuals with traumatic brain injury and their partners. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2011;26(1):56–68. doi:10.1097/HTR.0b013e3182048ee9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed RM, Kaizik C, Irish M, Mioshi E, Dermody, NKiernan MC, Piguet O, Hodges JR, et al. Characterizing sexual behaviour in frontotemporal dementia. J Alzheimer’s Dis. 2015;46(3):677–86. doi:10.3233/JAD-150034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kettl P. Inappropriate sexual behaviour in long-term care. Ann Long-Term Care. 2008;16:29–35.
   Google Scholar
• Huey E. A critical review of disinhibition in neuropsychiatry. 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Knight C, Alderman N, Johnson C, Green S, Birkett-Swan L, Yorstan G. The St Andrew’s Sexual Behaviour Assessment (SASBA): development of a standardised recording instrument for the measurement and assessment of challenging sexual behaviour in people with progressive and acquired neurological impairment. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2010;18(2):129–59. doi:10.1080/09602010701822381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bach LJ, David AS. Self-awareness after acquired and traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2006;16:397–414. doi:10.1080/09602010500412830.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zamboni G, Graffman J, Krueger F, Knutson KM, Huey ED. Anosognosia for behavioral disturbances in frontotemporal dementia and corticobasal syndrome: a voxel-based morphometry study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2010;29:88–96. doi:10.1159/000255141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindau ST, Schumm LP, Laumann EO, Levinson W, O’Muircheartaigh CA, Waite LJ. A study of sexuality and health among older adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):762–74. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa067423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grace J, Malloy P. Frontal systems behavior scale (FrSBe): professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Jurica PJ, Leitten CL, Mattis S. Dementia rating scale-2: DRS-2: professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Wechsler D. Adult intelligence scale. New York: Pearson; 1997. 21p.
   Google Scholar
• Folstein MF, Robins LN, Helzer JE. The mini-mental state examination. Archives of general psychiatry. Princ Pract Geriatr Psychiatry. 1983 Jul 1;40(7):812-.
   Google Scholar
• Cummings JL, Mega M, Gray K, Rosenberg-Thompson S, Carusi DA, Gornbein J. The Neuropsychiatric Inventory: comprehensive assessment of psychopathology in dementia. Neurology. 1994;44:2308–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandberg MA. Neurobehavioral rating scale. Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology. New York, NY: Springer; 2011. 1740–42p.
   Google Scholar
• Raymont V, Salazar AM, Krueger F, Grafman J. “Studying injured minds” - the Vietnam head injury study and 40 years of brain injury research. Front Neurol. 2011;2:15. doi:10.3389/fneur.2011.00015.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rascovsky K, Hodges JR, Knopman D, Mendez MF, Kramer JH, Neuhaus J, Van Swieten JC, Seelaar H, Dopper EG, Onyike CU, Hillis AE, et al. Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia. Brain. 2011;134(Pt 9):2456–77. doi:10.1093/brain/awr179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boeve BF. In: Corticobasal degeneration: the syndrome and the disease. Litvan I, editor. Atypical parkinsonian disorders: clinical and research aspects. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press Inc; 2005. 309–34p.
   Google Scholar
• Sander AM, Maestas KL, Pappadis MR, Sherer M, Hammond FM, Hanks R. Sexual functioning 1 year after traumatic brain injury: findings from a prospective traumatic brain injury model systems collaborative study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(8):1331–37. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2012.03.037.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toland MD. Practical guide to conducting an item response theory analysis. J Early Adolesc. 2014;34(1):120–51. doi:10.1177/0272431613511332.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fieo RA, Austin EJ, Starr JM, Deary IJ. Calibrating ADL-IADL scales to improve measurement accuracy and to extend the disability construct into the preclinical range: a systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 2011;11(1):42. doi:10.1186/1471-2318-11-42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Ayala R. Methodology in the social sciences. The theory and practice of item response theory. New York: Guilford Press; 2009. doi:10.3102/10769986030003295.
   Google Scholar
• Olatunji BO, Ebesutani C, Sawchuk CN, McKay D, Lohr JM, Kleinknecht RA. Development and initial validation of the medical fear survey-short version. Assessment. 2012;19(3):318–36. doi:10.1177/1073191111415368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kersten P, Ashburn A, George S, Low J. The subjective index for physical and social outcome (SIPSO) in stroke: investigation of its subscale structure. BMC Neurol. 2010;10(16):1–9. doi:10.1186/1471-2377-10-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillespie M, Tenvergert EM, Kingma J. Using Mokken scale analysis to develop unidimensional scales. Qual Quantity. 1987;21(4):393–408. doi:10.1007/BF00172565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen KB, Kreiner S, Mesbah M. Rasch models in health. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum PR. Criterion-related construct validity. Psychometrika. 1989;54(4):625–33. doi:10.1007/BF02296400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson R, van der Ark LA, Lin LC, Fieo R, Deary IJ, Meijer RR. Item response theory: how Mokken scaling can be used in clinical practice. J Clin Nurs. 2011;21(19–20):2736–46. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03893.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stochl J, Jones PB, Croudace TJ. Mokken scale analysis of mental health and well-being questionnaire item responses: a non-parametric IRT method in empirical research for applied health researchers. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12(1):74. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molenaar I, Sijtsma K. MSP5 for Windows iec ProGAMMA. Groningen, The Netherlands: Iec Progamma. 2000.
   Google Scholar
• van der Heijden PGM, Van Buuren S, Fekkes M, Radder J, Verrips E. Unidimensionality and reliability under Mokken scaling of the dutch language version of the SF-36. Qual Life Res. 2003;12:189–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roorda LD, Scholtes VA, Van Der Lee JH, Becher J, Dallmeijer AJ. Measuring mobility limitations in children with cerebral palsy: development, scalability, unidimensionality, and internal consistency of the Mobility Questionnaire, MobQues47. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91:1194–209. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2010.05.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Embretson SE, Reise SP. Item response theory for psychologists. London, UK: Psychology Press; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Sijtsma K, Molenaar I. Introduction to nonparametric item response theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Moorer P, Suurmeijer TP. A study of the unidimensionality and cumulativeness of the MOS short-form general health survey. Psychol Rep. 1994;74:467–70. doi:10.2466/pr0.1994.74.2.467.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray AL, McKenzie K, Murray KR, Richelieu M. Mokken scales for testing both pre-and postintervention: an analysis of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation—outcome Measure (CORE–OM) before and after counseling. Psychol Assess. 2014;26(4):1196. doi:10.1037/pas0000015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuijpers RE, van der Ark LA, Croon MA, Sijtsma K. Bias in point estimates and standard errors of mokken’s scalability coefficients. Appl Psychol Meas. 2016;40(5):331–45. doi:10.1177/0146621616638500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smits IA, Timmerman ME, Meijer RR. Exploratory Mokken Scale Analysis as a dimensionality assessment tool: why scalability does not imply unidimensionality. Appl Psychol Meas. 2012;36(6):516–39. doi:10.1177/0146621612451050.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kempen GM, Suurmeijer TP. The development of a hierarchical polychotomous ADL-IADL scale for noninstitutionalized elders. Gerontologist. 1990;30:407–502. doi:10.1093/geront/30.4.497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller BL, Darby AL, Swartz JR, Yener GG, Mena I. Dietary changes, compulsions and sexual behavior in frontotemporal degeneration. Dementia. 1995;6(4):195–99.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Teresi JA, Kleinman M, Ocepek‐Welikson K. Modern psychometric methods for detection of differential item functioning: application to cognitive assessment measures. Stat Med. 2000;19(11–12):1651–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streiner D, Norman G. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4 ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss ME, Smith GT. Construct validity: advances in theory and methodology. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2009;5:1–25. doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.032408.153639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar