Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017 Jun;107(6):1370-1379.e5.
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.04.008. Epub 2017 May 10.

Validation study of the SCREENIVF: an instrument to screen women or men on risk for emotional maladjustment before the start of a fertility treatment

Affiliations
Free article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Validation study of the SCREENIVF: an instrument to screen women or men on risk for emotional maladjustment before the start of a fertility treatment

Henrietta D L Ockhuijsen et al. Fertil Steril. 2017 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: To examine construct and criterion validity of the Dutch SCREENIVF among women and men undergoing a fertility treatment.

Design: A prospective longitudinal study nested in a randomized controlled trial.

Setting: University hospital.

Patient(s): Couples, 468 women and 383 men, undergoing an IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment in a fertility clinic, completed the SCREENIVF.

Main outcome measure(s): Construct and criteria validity of the SCREENIVF.

Result(s): The comparative fit index and root mean square error of approximation for women and men show a good fit of the factor model. Across time, the sensitivity for Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale subscale in women ranged from 61%-98%, specificity 53%-65%, predictive value of a positive test (PVP) 13%-56%, predictive value of a negative test (PVN) 70%-99%. The sensitivity scores for men ranged from 38%-100%, specificity 71%-75%, PVP 9%-27%, PVN 92%-100%. A prediction model revealed that for women 68.7% of the variance in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale on time 1 and 42.5% at time 2 and 38.9% at time 3 was explained by the predictors, the sum score scales of the SCREENIVF. For men, 58.1% of the variance in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale on time 1 and 46.5% at time 2 and 37.3% at time 3 was explained by the predictors, the sum score scales of the SCREENIVF.

Conclusion(s): The SCREENIVF has good construct validity but the concurrent validity is better than the predictive validity. SCREENIVF will be most effectively used in fertility clinics at the start of treatment and should not be used as a predictive tool.

Keywords: Screening; assisted reproductive techniques; infertility; psychology; validation studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources