Table 6.
Quality of measurement properties per instrumenta
| Instrument | Internal consistency | Reliability | Content validity | Structural validity | Hypothesis testing | Responsiveness |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAAS | +++ | ++ | ? | ± | +++ | + |
| KIMS | +++ | +b | ? | ? | ++c | na |
| FMI | +++ | na | na | ? | ± | na |
| CAMS-R | ++ | na | na | ++ | ++ | na |
| SMQ | +++ | na | na | - - | ± | na |
| FFMQ | +++ | na | na | + | +++d | na |
| TMS | +++ | na | ? | ++ | ++ | ?e |
| EQ | +++ | na | na | +++ | +++ | na |
| MMS | +++f | na | na | - - - | na | na |
| PHLMS | +++ | na | ? | ++ | ± | na |
a
There was no evidence to evaluate measurement error for these instruments.
b
Test-retest results were adequate for 3 of 4 subscales.
c
Rating for the global score is ++, ratings for subscales range from +++ for Accept without Judgment to − for Observe.
d
Ratings for subscales Observe and Describe are less often consistently positive than ratings for the other subscales.
e
One of the two subscales has been shown to be responsive.
f
This was evaluated with the whole MMS score only.