Eileen Bousché, Isabel Gosselt, Melissa Vrijhoeven, Tanja C W Nijboer
{"title":"CoCo-P建构效度:参与过程中的认知抱怨与认知和情绪后果之间的关联。","authors":"Eileen Bousché, Isabel Gosselt, Melissa Vrijhoeven, Tanja C W Nijboer","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2025.2522300","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cognitive complaints are common following acquired brain injury (ABI) and can hinder social participation. To address this, the CoCo-P was developed as a tool to identify cognitive restrictions experienced in various everyday contexts, such as work and leisure. This study aimed to evaluate the construct validity of the CoCo-P by assessing its associations with two widely used clinical questionnaires, the USER-P and CLCE-24, as reference measures. Forty-five ABI survivors completed these questionnaires, along with assessments of mood (HADS), self-efficacy (GSES), health-related quality of life (EQ6D), and cognitive functioning (MoCA). Results indicated strong positive associations between the CoCo-P and both USER-P and CLCE-24. Additionally, self-efficacy was strongly negatively associated with reported restrictions, while no significant associations were observed with estimated mood disorders or cognitive functions. These findings demonstrate the construct validity of the CoCo-P, supporting its potential as a valid tool for assessing cognitive restrictions experienced in daily life by individuals with ABI.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Construct validity of the CoCo-P: Associations between cognitive complaints during participation and cognitive and emotional consequences.\",\"authors\":\"Eileen Bousché, Isabel Gosselt, Melissa Vrijhoeven, Tanja C W Nijboer\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2025.2522300\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Cognitive complaints are common following acquired brain injury (ABI) and can hinder social participation. To address this, the CoCo-P was developed as a tool to identify cognitive restrictions experienced in various everyday contexts, such as work and leisure. This study aimed to evaluate the construct validity of the CoCo-P by assessing its associations with two widely used clinical questionnaires, the USER-P and CLCE-24, as reference measures. Forty-five ABI survivors completed these questionnaires, along with assessments of mood (HADS), self-efficacy (GSES), health-related quality of life (EQ6D), and cognitive functioning (MoCA). Results indicated strong positive associations between the CoCo-P and both USER-P and CLCE-24. Additionally, self-efficacy was strongly negatively associated with reported restrictions, while no significant associations were observed with estimated mood disorders or cognitive functions. These findings demonstrate the construct validity of the CoCo-P, supporting its potential as a valid tool for assessing cognitive restrictions experienced in daily life by individuals with ABI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2025.2522300\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2025.2522300","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Construct validity of the CoCo-P: Associations between cognitive complaints during participation and cognitive and emotional consequences.
Cognitive complaints are common following acquired brain injury (ABI) and can hinder social participation. To address this, the CoCo-P was developed as a tool to identify cognitive restrictions experienced in various everyday contexts, such as work and leisure. This study aimed to evaluate the construct validity of the CoCo-P by assessing its associations with two widely used clinical questionnaires, the USER-P and CLCE-24, as reference measures. Forty-five ABI survivors completed these questionnaires, along with assessments of mood (HADS), self-efficacy (GSES), health-related quality of life (EQ6D), and cognitive functioning (MoCA). Results indicated strong positive associations between the CoCo-P and both USER-P and CLCE-24. Additionally, self-efficacy was strongly negatively associated with reported restrictions, while no significant associations were observed with estimated mood disorders or cognitive functions. These findings demonstrate the construct validity of the CoCo-P, supporting its potential as a valid tool for assessing cognitive restrictions experienced in daily life by individuals with ABI.
期刊介绍:
pplied Neuropsychology-Adult publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in adults. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of adult patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.