Observational studies are based on systematic observation, understood as an organized recording and quantification of behavior in its natural context. Applied to the specific area of sports, observational studies present advantages when comparing studies based on other designs, such as the flexibility for adapting to different contexts and the possibility of using non-standardized instruments as well as a high degree of development in specific software and data analysis. Although the importance and usefulness of sports-related observational studies have been widely shown, there is no checklist to report these studies. Consequently, authors do not have a guide to follow in order to include all of the important elements in an observational study in sports areas, and reviewers do not have a reference tool for assessing this type of work. To resolve these issues, this article aims to develop a checklist to measure the quality of sports-related observational studies based on a content validity study. The participants were 22 judges with at least 3 years of experience in observational studies, sports areas, and methodology. They evaluated a list of 60 items systematically selected and classified into 12 dimensions. They were asked to score four aspects of each item on 5-point Likert scales to measure the following dimensions: representativeness, relevance, utility, and feasibility. The judges also had an open-format section for comments. The Osterlind index was calculated for each item and for each of the four aspects. Items were considered appropriate when obtaining a score of at least 0.5 in the four assessed aspects. After considering these inclusion criteria and all of the open-format comments, the resultant checklist consisted of 54 items grouped into the same initial 12 dimensions. Finally, we highlight the strengths of this work. We also present its main limitation: the need to apply the resultant checklist to obtain data and, thus, increase quality indicators of its psychometric properties. For this reason, as relevant actions for further development, we encourage expert readers to use it and provide feedback; we plan to apply it to different sport areas.

An adequate work climate fosters productivity in organizations and increases employee satisfaction. Workers in emergency health services (EHS) have an extremely high degree of responsibility and consequent stress. Therefore, it is essential to foster a good work climate in this context. Despite this, scales with a full study of their psychometric properties (i.e., validity evidence based on test content, internal structure and relations to other variables, and reliability) are not available to measure work climate in EHS specifically. For this reason, our objective was to develop a scale to measure the quality of work climates in EHS. We carried out three studies. In Study 1, we used a mixed-method approach to identify the latent conceptual structure of the construct work climate. Thus, we integrated the results found in (a) a previous study, where a content analysis of seven in-depth interviews obtained from EHS professionals in two hospitals in Gibraltar Countryside County was carried out; and (b) the factor analysis of the responses given by 113 EHS professionals from these same centers to 18 items that measured the work climate in health organizations. As a result, we obtained 56 items grouped into four factors (work satisfaction, productivity/achievement of aims, interpersonal relationships, and performance at work). In Study 2, we presented validity evidence based on test content through experts' judgment. Fourteen experts from the methodology and health fields evaluated the representativeness, utility, and feasibility of each of the 56 items with respect to their factor (theoretical dimension). Forty items met the inclusion criterion, which was to obtain an Osterlind index value greater than or equal to 0.5 in the three aspects assessed. In Study 3, 201 EHS professionals from the same centers completed the resulting 40-item scale. This new instrument produced validity evidence based on the internal structure in a second-order factor model with four components (RMSEA = 0.079, GFI = 0.97, AGFI = 0.97, CFI = 0.97; NFI = 0.95, and NNFI = 0.97); absence of Differential Item Functioning (DIF) in 80% of the items; reliability (α = 0.96); and validity evidence based on relations to other variables, specifically the test-criterion relationship (ρ = 0.680). Finally, we discuss further developments of the instrument and its possible implications for EHS workers.

La evidencia utilizada al tomar decisiones sobre el diseño, implementación y evaluación en los programas de intervención debe ser metodológicamente sólida. Dependiendo del contexto de la intervención, se pueden aplicar diferentes metodologías. Sin embargo, el contexto de la intervención es a menudo inestable y, para adaptarse a las circunstancias cambiantes, se hace necesario modificar el plan original. El marco propuesto en este documento se basa en enfoques que pueden considerarse dos extremos de un continuo (diseños experimentales / cuasiexperimentales y estudios basados en metodología observacional). En condiciones de contexto de intervención inestable, esto permite tomar decisiones desde un enfoque de calidad metodológica en cuanto a diseño, medición y análisis. Las dimensiones estructurales, i.e., las unidades (participantes, usuarios), el tratamiento (actividades del programa), los resultados (incluidas las decisiones sobre los instrumentos a utilizar y la recopilación de datos), el entorno (contexto de implementación) y el tiempo se detallarán como parte del marco práctico. El presente estudio tiene como objetivo especificar el grado de correspondencia / complementariedad entre componentes en estas dimensiones estructurales de la evaluación de un programa desde una perspectiva de complementariedad práctica basada en la calidad metodológica. The evidence used when making decisions about the design, implementation and evaluation in intervention programs should be methodologically sound. Depending on the context of the intervention, different methodologies may apply. Nonetheless, the intervention context is often unstable and, to adapt to changing circumstances, it sometimes becomes necessary to modify the original plan. The framework proposed herein draws on approaches that can be considered two extremes of a continuum (experimental/quasi-experimental designs and studies based on observational methodology). In unstable intervention context conditions, this enables decisions from a methodological quality approach regarding design, measurement, and analysis. Structural dimensions, i.e., units (participants, users), treatment (program activities), outcomes (results, including decisions about the instruments to use and data gathering), setting (implementation context) and time will be detailed as part of the practical framework. The present study aims to specify the degree of correspondence/complementarity between components in these structural dimensions of a program evaluation from a practical complementarity perspective based on methodological quality.

Background: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is one of the most prevalent psychiatric disorders among school-age children and is characterized by varying degrees of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. Diagnosis, which currently relies on the DSM-V criteria, is complex. This research proposes an integrated procedure for ADHD diagnosis in children, improving the diagnostic process and scientific research on etiopathology.Materials and methods: We conducted a clinical report on ADHD diagnosis in children (n = 92) between the ages of 8 and 13, based on the results of the application of different scales to parents of school-age children in Chile. The children were divided into two groups, those with an ADHD diagnosis (n = 44) and those without (n = 48) (24% females).Results: The results revealed statistically significant differences between groups for scales EDAH y SDQ-Cas, Conners Comprehensive Behavior Scale, Conners Parent Scale and the criteria according to the DSM-V and its dimensions, with the exception of inattention.Conclusion: The findings indicate the importance of appropriate criteria and procedures to establish a diagnosis and implement effective interventions in ADHD.

This study is based on a 40-item work climate scale in hospital emergency services (WCSHES). Teams working in these emergency services experience a heavy workload and have a limited amount of time with each patient. COVID-19 has further complicated these existing issues. Therefore, we believed it would be helpful to draft an abridged version of the 40-item WCSHES, considering both validity and reliability criteria, but giving greater weight to validity. One hundred and twenty-six workers between the ages of 20 to 64 (M = 32.45; standard deviation (SD = 9.73)) years old participated voluntarily in the study. The validity, reliability, and fit model were evaluated in an iterative process. The confirmatory factor analysis yielded appropriate global fit indices in the abridged 24-item version (Χ²(248) = 367.84; p < 0.01, RMSEA = 0.06 with an interval of 90% from 0.05 to 0.07, SRMR = 0.08, GFI = 0.9, AGFI = 0.96, CFI = 0.98, NFI = 0.95, and NNFI = 0.98), along with test criteria validity (ρ_XY = 0.68, p < 0.001) and excellent reliability (α = 0.94 and ω = 0.94), maintaining the same conceptualization and usefulness of the original scale. The abridged 24-item version was used to measure four work climate factors (work satisfaction, productivity/achievement of aims, interpersonal relations, and performance at work). Evidence of the usefulness of the new abridged scale is provided along with a description of our study limitations and future areas for development.

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of interventions to promote fruit and vegetable (FV) consumption usually report intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis as the main outcome. These analyses compare the randomly assigned groups and accept that some individuals may not follow the recommendations received in their group. The ITT analysis is useful to quantify the global effect of promoting the consumption of FV in a population (effectiveness) but, if non-adherence is significant in the RCT, they cannot estimate the specific effect in the individuals that increased their FV consumption (efficacy). To calculate the efficacy of FV consumption, a per protocol analysis (PP) would have to be carried out, in which groups of individuals are compared according to their actual adherence to FV consumption, regardless of the group to which they were assigned; unfortunately, many RCTs do not report the PP analysis. The objective of this article is to apply a new method to estimate the efficacy of Meta-analysis (MA) PP which include RCTs of effectiveness by ITT, without estimates of adherence. The method is based on generating Monte Carlo simulations of percentages of adherence in each allocation group from prior distributions informed by expert knowledge. We illustrate the method reanalyzing a Cochrane Systematic Review (SR) of RCTs on increased FV consumption reported with ITT, simulating 1000 times the estimation of a PP meta-analyses, and obtaining means and ranges of the potential PP effects. In some cases, the range of estimated PP effects was clearly more favourable than the effect calculated with the original ITT assumption, and therefore this corrected analysis must be considered when estimating the true effect of the consumption of a certain food.