ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) applicability evaluation tool, a preliminary revised tool, by using it to appraise specific clinical guidelines.MethodsMedical staffs were sampled from relevant departments in domestic medical institutions to use tool to evaluate the two guidelines. Spearman-Brown coefficient of odd-even split-half method and Cronbach's alpha coefficient were used to evaluate the split-half reliability and internal consistency reliability. The convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated by correlation analysis and correlation coefficient comparison hypothesis test, and the structural validity was investigated by confirmatory factor analysis based on structural equation.ResultsThe split-half reliability of the evaluation tool was 0.86, and the Cronbach's coefficient of the whole tool and each dimension were greater than 0.7 for two guidelines. The success rates of tool convergent and discriminant validity calibration were 100%. In the second-order confirmatory factor analysis model, the χ2 and df were 3.38 and 2.46, the comparative fit index (CFI) were 0.872 and 0.974, the goodness of fit index (GFI) were 0.954 and 0.983, and the adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) were 0.846 and 0.959 for two guidelines respectively. Both standard root mean square residual (SRMR) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were less than 0.09. Both P values of RMSEA hypothesis test were greater than 0.05.ConclusionsThe evaluation scale is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the applicability of CPGs, which should be further evaluated in practical applications in the future.
ObjectiveTo formulate the Chinese version of Fear of Progression Questionnaire-Short Form/Caregiver Version (FoP-Q-SF/C) and examine the reliability and validity of the scale.MethodsA questionnaire survey of FoP-Q-SF/C was conducted among the caregivers of melanoma out-patients in West China Hospital of Sichuan University from June 2019 to March 2020. Convenient sampling method was adopted. The validity and reliability of the scale were analyzed.ResultsA total of 247 caregivers of melanoma out-patients were investigated by the FoP-Q-SF/C, and 101 valid questionnaires were finally collected. The Cronbach’s α of the FoP-Q-SF/C scale was 0.919, and the Guttman Split-Half coefficient was 0.906. Using exploratory factor analysis to extract 3 common factors, the cumulative explainable total variation was 73.964%. The model fit was as follows: chi-square/degree of freedom was 1.950, standardized root mean square residual was 0.067, goodness of fit index was 0.859, incremental fit index was 0.939, comparative fit index was 0.938, Tucker-Lewis index or non-normed fit index was 0.918, and the root-mean-square error of approximation was 0.097.ConclusionsThe FoP-Q-SF/C scale formulated in this study is divided into three dimensions, which has good reliability and validity, meanwhile, it is relatively simple and can be used to clinically screen melanoma caregivers’ FoP-Q-SF/C levels. However, the application of this scale in other diseases still needs further testing.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the reliability and validity of Guideline Implementation Success Assessment Tool (A-GIST). MethodsWith the guideline for the prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in China (2020 edition) as the target guideline, health care providers and patients from different hospitals across the country were investigated by questionnaire using A-GIST. Spearman-Brown coefficient and Cronbach's α coefficient were used to evaluate the split-half reliability and internal consistency reliability, while the structural validity, convergent validity and discriminant validity were investigated by confirmatory factor analysis based on structural equation. ResultsThe internal consistency reliability and split half reliability coefficients of the whole tool and each dimension ranged from 0.650 to 0.986. The scale-level content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) of content validity was 0.846. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that, the χ2/df of two sections of the tool were 8.695 and 6.123, respectively. The root mean square residual (RMR), the standard root mean square residual (SRMR) and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were under or almost under the threshold. Besides, the goodness-of-fit index (GFI) of them were 0.901 and 0.822, the adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI) were 0.836 and 0.787, and the parsimonious normed fit index (PNFI) were 0.545 and 0.788, respectively. ConclusionGuideline Implementation Success Assessment Tool (A-GIST) was proved to be valid and reliable, and it shows that it is necessary to optimize the items under the dimensions of maintenance and evaluation of diagnosis and treatment effect in the future.
Objective The effectiveness of systematic identification, description and evaluation of dietary sugar reduction strategies through the evidence diagram method. Methods The CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, CBM, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library database were electronically searched to collect systematic reviews/meta-analysis on the effectiveness of dietary sugar reduction strategies from inception to November 10, 2022, AMSTAR-2 was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. Microsoft Excel 2019 was used to design a data extraction table to extract relevant key information. Bubble charts were used to comprehensively present information such as study population, intervention type, number of primary studies included, and outcome measures. Results A total of 11 papers were included, all of which were systematic reviews/meta-analysis. The studies included ten interventions. Among them, the research ending of behavioral changes strategies, healthy diet, sugar tax, material substitution, sugar label, and community intervention showed obvious effectiveness, while social cognitive models, sugar reduction guidelines, health literacy, and knowledge attitude behavior models had not shown a clear and beneficial effect, indicating that the intervention effect on the theoretical basis was very small. Conclusion The current evidence diagram shows that the sugar reduction strategy is effective, but there are also intervention conclusions that the effectiveness of the conclusion is not clear and intervention blank. And based on the theoretical dietary sugar reduction strategy, the validity evidence is relatively scarce. In the future, high quality research will still be required.
ObjectiveTo compare the performance of 36-item short form health survey (SF-36) and World Health Organization quality of life-bref (WHOQOL-Bref) in assessing quality of life (QOL) in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis (TB).
MethodsThe WHOQOL-Bref questionnaire and the SF-36 questionnaire were administered to patients with tuberculosis undergoing treatment from July to September 2013. The statistical methods of reliability analysis, factor analysis and the Pearson correlation coefficient analysis were used.
ResultsIt showed that the WHOQOL-Bref and the SF-36 both had good reliability (Cronbach α=0.863 and 0.920, respectively). Constructive validity of the two instruments were checked by factor analysis and the Pearson correlation coefficient analysis, which indicated that both the two instruments had good validity. Among scales measuring similar concepts, many subscales of the SF-36 and the four domains of the WHOQOL-Bref unexpectedly had a fair correlation with one another. For example, the physical QOL, psychological QOL, and social relation QOL domains of the WHOQOL-Bref and physical functioning, mental health, and social functioning of the SF-36 were 0.482, 0.745, and 0.572, respectively.
ConclusionThe WHOQOL-Bref and the SF-36 have an approximately equivalent practicability in assessing the quality of life in patients with TB.
Objective We aimed to develop a self-management assessment scale for children with epilepsy and test its reliability and validity. Methods A research group was established, and the items were revised through literature review, group discussion and pre-investigation, and 280 patients with epilepsy in children were included, and the reliability and validity of the scale were tested. Results 28 items in 4 dimensions were developed to form the scale, namely, knowledge and belief of diseases and medication, compliance of medication and treatment, self-efficacy of medication and obstacles of medication. Confirmatory factor analysis extracted four common factors with characteristic roots greater than 1, and the cumulative variance explanation rate was 65.639%. The factor load of all items is > 0.5. The overall Cronbach’s alpha is 0.880, and the coefficients in seven measurement dimensions are all greater than 0.8. Conclusion The self-management assessment scale for children’s epilepsy drugs has good reliability and validity, and can provide a measuring tool for the drug management of children’s epilepsy diseases.
Objective To develop a behavioral assessment scale for medication management plans in women of childbearing age with epilepsy and to test its reliability and validity. Methods Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior, a pool of questionnaire items was initially drafted through literature review and focus group discussions. A two-round Delphi expert consultation was conducted with 15 experts to form a test version of the behavioral assessment scale for medication management plans in women of childbearing age with epilepsy (including 27 items and 5 dimensions). Convenience sampling was used to conduct surveys among women of childbearing age with epilepsy in some tertiary hospitals in Chuxiong, Shenzhen and Wuhan from February to May 2024 (the first time) and from June to October 2024 (the second time). ResultsThe effective recovery rates of the two rounds of questionnaires were 95.5% and 94.6%, respectively. The final scale included 24 items and 5 dimensions, with good reliability and validity: the content validity index (S-CVI) was 0.934, Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.876, split-half reliability was 0.819, and test-retest reliability was 0.901; exploratory factor analysis extracted 5 factors (cumulative variance explained rate 73.97%, item load 0.42~0.85), and confirmatory factor analysis showed that the model had good fit (χ2/df=1.849, RMSEA=0.075, CFI, GFI, AGFI, IFI, TLI all>0.85). Conclusion The scale meets the reliability and validity standards and can be used to assess the medication management plans and behaviors of women of childbearing age with epilepsy.
Objective To investigate the validity of estimating American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade with a bowel-routine based self-administered questionnaire for assessment of sacral sparing after spinal cord injury (SCI).Methods The 5-item SCI sacral sparing self-report questionnaire was administrated to SCI inpatients from August 2014 to July 2016, followed by an standardized digital rectal examination. Question 1 (perceiving the tissue), Question 2 (identifying the water temperature as warm or cold), Question 3 (perceiving the inserted finger), and Question 4 (perceiving the inserted enema tube) tested the sensory sacral sparing, and Question 5 (holding the enema for more than 1 min) evaluated the voluntary anal sphincter contraction. Based on the answers from each participant, the sensory and motor sacral sparing was implied, and an estimated AIS grade (AIS A, AIS B, or AIS C/D) was recorded. Agreement of the estimated AIS grade and the actual AIS grade according to the physical examination was analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity, and Youden’s index of the questionnaire for estimating completeness of injury were calculated.ResultsA total of 102 SCI patients were enrolled. The general agreement of estimated and actual AIS grades was good (κ=0.681, P<0.001). For the estimation of a complete injury, both the sensitivity (87.10%) and the specificity (100.00%) of this questionnaire were high, with a Youden’s index of 0.87. For the estimation of a motor complete injury, the sensitivity increased (92.00%) while the specificity decreased slightly (75.00%), with a Youden’s index of 0.67.ConclusionsThe validity of this self-report questionnaire for estimation of AIS grade is good. In some situations, it could be considered as an alternative tool for the estimation of sacral sparing as well as the AIS grades within SCI individuals, especially when repeated anorectal examinations are not feasible.
ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to translate the U-CEP scale into Chinese, and evaluate the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the U-CEP, in order to provide a measurement and evaluation tool for clinical epidemiology education and research. MethodsThe U-CEP scale was translated and adapted using the Brislin translation model. A nationwide survey of clinicians was conducted using the Chinese version of the U-CEP. Item analysis, reliability analysis, and validity analysis were performed using SPSS 26.0 software. ResultsThe discriminant validity analysis showed that except for item 4, the critical value (CR) of the other twenty-four items differed significantly between high and low groups (P<0.01), with CR values ranging from 2.902 to 14.609. The ITCs of the 25 items were all positive, with 5 items having an ITC<0.15(20%), 2 items having ITC≥0.15~0.20 (8%), 6 items having ITC≥0.20~0.40 (24%) and 12 items having ITC≥0.40 (48%). In terms of reliability, the overall Cronbach’s α coefficient of the Chinese version of the U-CEP was 0.80, with Cronbach’s α coefficient ranging from 0.752 to 0.805 when deleting each item one by one. The test-retest reliability was 0.848 (P<0.001). The alternative-form reliability was 0.838 (P<0.001). In terms of validity, expert analysis showed that the content validity of the Chinese version of the U-CEP was good. The construct validity analysis showed that the cumulative contribution rate of the 25 items was 57.50%. No respondent scored full marks or zero marks, indicating that no ceiling or floor effects were found. There were statistically significant differences in the total scores among clinicians with different educational backgrounds or with or without systematic learning of relevant knowledge (P<0.05). ConclusionThe Chinese version of the U-CEP has good reliability and validity, as well as good cultural adaptability. It can effectively assess a physician's knowledge of clinical epidemiology.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the reliability,validity and feasibility of a patient-reported outcomes (PRO) scale in the subjects with respiratory failure.
Methods364 patients with chronic respiratory failure and 97 healthy subjects were face-to-face interviewed by well-trained investigators,and the data of respiratory failure -PRO instrument were collected. The psychometric performance such as reliability,validity,responsiveness and clinical feasibility in the respiratory failure -PRO instrument was evaluated.
ResultsThe Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the respiratory failure -PRO instrument and each dimension were greater than 0.7. Factor analysis showed that the instrument had good construct validity. The scores of each of the facets and total scores between the patients and the healthy subjects were different. The recovery rate and the efficient rate of the questionnaire were more than 95%,and the time required to complete a questionnaire was within 15 minutes,indicating that the scale had a high clinical feasibility.
ConclusionThe respiratory failure -PRO instrument has good reliability,validity,responsiveness and clinical feasibility.
