Jason Hassan

Anyone else had this when publishing in a journal? Reviewer asked for major revisions → I did them. Then they said “accept with minor” → I did those too. Now they’re back demanding major again, raising new points never mentioned before (even contradicting themselves). Some comments feel AI-generated

Welcome @clearinghouse.bsky.social!

Thanks Elena. How is 2nd year going?

Reminder. If you're on the DClin, qualified or are aspiring. Feel free to comment below to be added to the starter pack.

How is everyone? I'm finally back. Submitted my #dclin thesis a few weeks ago. Viva is on the 19th of May. The end is getting closer and closer!

OPSYRIS has joined BlueSky! We are an organisation focused on promoting research on psychological outcomes of stroke with the aim of improving clinical practice. Learn more about us (and our upcoming conference 👀) on our website
opsyris.org

🧠 What’s next in research on psychological aspects of #stroke? Join #OPSYRIS2025 ! Share your insights, present your work, and connect with fellow researchers on 11th July 2025 at @uniofmanchester.bsky.social

🔗To submit your abstracts for talks or posters: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...

🚨 Call for Abstracts #OPSYRIS2025 ! 🚨
Conducting research into psychological aspects of #stroke? Submit your abstract & present at the OPSYRIS Conference @officialuom.bsky.social on 11th July! 🧠✨
🔗Submit abstracts: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...
🔗Registration: www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/opsyris-20...

Hello BlueSky #PPI world! Do you have examples of best practice that our #DClinPsy trainees can be inspired by? Short YouTube clips ideal….

Putting together a new lecture on “PPI in research” for our first years 👍

Thanks in advance

#Involvement #ClinicalPsychology

a cartoon of a horse with flowers and a box that says netflix ALT: a cartoon of a horse with flowers and a box that says netflix

Every time I visit Twitter and then return to BluSky. It's like taking that first deep breath of fresh air

Come and join our global team building capacity in child and adolescent mental health - we need a new Managing Director - new york city based - amazing opportinity for someone with experience in global mental health workforcenow.adp.com/mascsr/defau...

It doesn't help that some papers will evaluate the structural validity for the entire measure, not the subscales, but only evaluate internal consistency for the subscales, not the whole measure. Sometimes, they only report on the internal consistency for the entire measure, not the subscales.

And this is what it says regarding unidimensionality and internal consistency.

Also, from what I've seen so far, most papers have evaluated structural validity for the entire measure, not the subscales individually. So again, not sure if those results apply to the subscales separately or not.

Hi Rogier, thanks for your response. So COMSIN is a tool that evaluates measures based on different properties, i.e., Content validity, structural validity, etc...

COSMIN states that measures with subscales and total scores must be evaluated separately.

I'm very new to this area of research. So if anyone can help and especially if they're familiar with COSMIN, I'd really appreciate some input.

Thanks

So if a measure has 3 subscales and has a total score, that's 4 separate measures. One measure, used a 3 factor model in their CFA, which suggests multidimensionality. But then report an explained variance of 62%, which my supervisor believes provides evidence of unidimensionality.

Whether there is evidence of unidimensionality. All my studies are using either CFA, PCA, or EFA. I've tried reading literature, speaking with my supervisor, and even asking CHATGPT out of desperation.

In COSMIN, I need to evaluate the measures subscales and total measure separately.

Hi all. I'm not sure if this is the right place, but is there anyone who could help me. I'm doing an SR using COSMIN to evaluate wisdom measures.

Evaluating internal consistency requires evidence of unidimensionality based on the structural validity, and I can't figure out what to look for to know

This explains why conservative fear-mongering is such an easy play in America.

— Ppl believe trans ppl make up 21% of the population (Real number: 1%)
— Ppl believe Black ppl make up 41% of the nation (real number 12%)
— Ppl believe Jewish ppl make up 30% of the nation (Real number, 2%)

Could I be added to the list please?

I’m honoured to be launching this comprehensive briefing paper on FND neuropsychological and psychological management, across the lifespan, with a UK focus but global relevance - thanks to my fantastic colleagues on the Division of Neuropsychology Policy Unit working group 👏👏👏

Oh I'm obviously not with it. You're right, it is 0.8 😅

SRMR isn't, it needs to be below 0.06 to fall within the COSMIN threshold.

Thank you!

I've emailed them but not sure if I'll get a response. They have a meeting on the 19th of December which I'll attend but was hoping to get an answer before then.

My supervisor believes this proves some weak evidence of unidimensionality, but we weren’t sure if this interpretation aligns with COSMIN guidance.

Another measure used a 3-factor model with the following results:
χ²(48) = 182.22,
CFI = 0.937,
TLI = 0.913,
RMSEA = 0.060.

These don't meet sufficient criteria. However, they reported an explained variance of 62% without referencing EFA.

My supervisor thought the “OR” applies only when only one statistic is reported, but since all are reported, we're unsure if this meets the criteria. The fit indices of that measure;
CFI = 0.739,
TLI = 0.729,
SRMR = 0.063,
RMSEA = 0.052.
RMSEA is the only one that is within COSMINs threshold.

Regarding Structural validity, I understood the guidance to mean that if a measure meets any one of the criteria for CFA (CFI, TLI, RMSEA), it would be sufficient.

I'm using COSMIN to evaluate measures as part of my systematic review.

COSMIN has a table of their criteria for good measurement properties, and to determine if a measure's internal consistency is sufficient, there needs to be evidence of unidimensionality from the structural validity.