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.
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.
ObjectiveTo develop a survey questionnaire on preferences and values regarding perineal injury prevention measures during pregnancy and conduct reliability and validity tests. MethodsCombining literature reviews, qualitative interviews, and expert consultations, we summarized key elements of perineal injury prevention during pregnancy and synthesized the best evidence. Through multiple discussions within the core working group, a survey questionnaire on preferences and values regarding perineal injury prevention measures during pregnancy was formulated. Using convenience sampling, pregnant women were recruited, and a pre-survey was conducted using the questionnaire. Pre-survey results were analyzed using item analysis and reliability and validity testing methods to validate and refine the questionnaire. ResultsThe questionnaire was compiled based on the theory of evidence-based decision-making. The initial version of the questionnaire was developed by combining systematic evaluation, network meta-analysis, and semi-structured interviews. The questionnaire was modified and improved through expert consultation, group discussion, and pre-investigation, which ensured that the questionnaire had good reliability, validity, and practicability. The Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.87, the split-half reliability was 0.71, and the content validity index was 0.97 of the survey questionnaire. ConclusionThe present version of the perineal injury preventive measures preference and values questionnaire has good reliability, validity, and practicability. It can serve as a valuable tool for investigating preferences and values related to perineal injury prevention during pregnancy.
ObjectiveTo explore the validity period of oral sterilizing instruments in different packages inside the bio-safety cabinet.
MethodsInside the bio-safety cabinet, we brought the autoclaved dental gadgets packed in glassware and paper-plastic into microbial sampling cultivation experiment, and made observation of the bacteria growth at the 4th, 8th, 24th hour after sterilizing, with the sampling of once per 24 hours, lasting 10 days. Samples taken from the gadgets in paper-plastic each time when samples were taken from the gadgets in glassware were as the control.
ResultsUnder the condition that the bio-safety cabinet was not contaminated, no colony grew in neither group in 144 hours; 168 hours later, the cultivation results indicated that colonies started to grow（P<0.05）.
ConclusionUnder the condition that the bio-safety cabinet is pollution-free, the validity period of gadgets in glassware packaging for dental clinic practices is far longer than the 4-hour limit after the sterilized packages are opened, as is stipulated in the "Operating Specifications for Sterilization Technology on Dental Instruments of Medical Institutions".
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 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.
Evidence synthesis is the process of systematically gathering, analyzing, and integrating available research evidence. The quality of evidence synthesis depends on the quality of the original studies included. Validity assessment, also known as risk of bias assessment, is an essential method for assessing the quality of these original studies. Currently, there are numerous validity assessment tools available, but some of them lack a rigorous development process and evaluation. The application of inappropriate validity assessment tools to assessing the quality of the original studies during the evidence synthesis process may compromise the accuracy of study conclusions and mislead the clinical practice. To address this dilemma, the LATITUDES Network, a one-stop resource website for validity assessment tools, was established in September 2023, led by academics at the University of Bristol, U.K. This Network is dedicated to collecting, sorting and promoting validity assessment tools to improve the accuracy of original study validity assessments and increase the robustness and reliability of the results of evidence synthesis. This study introduces the background of the establishment of the LATITUDES Network, the included validity assessment tools, and the training resources for the use of validity assessment tools, in order to provide a reference for domestic scholars to learn more about the LATITUDES Network, to better use the appropriate validity assessment tools to conduct study quality assessments, and to provide references for the development of validity assessment tools.
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.
ObjectiveTo compare and evaluate the discrimination, validity, and reliability of different data envelopment analysis (DEA) models for measuring the effectiveness of models by selecting different input and output indicators of the model.MethodsData from health statistical reports and pilot program of diagnosis-related groups of tertiary hospitals in Hubei Province from 2017 to 2018 were used to analyze the discrimination, content and structure validity, and reliability of the models. Six DEA models were established by enriching the details of input and output on the basis of the input and output indicators of the conventional DEA model of hospitals.ResultsFrom the view of discrimination, the results of all models were left-skewed, the cost-efficiency model had the lowest left-skewed degree (skewness coefficient: -0.14) and was the flattest (kurtosis coefficient: -1.02). From the view of structure validity, the results of the cost-efficiency model were positively correlated with total weights, outpatient visits, and inpatient visits (r=0.328, 0.329, 0.315; P<0.05). From the perspective of content validity, the interpretation of model was more consistent with theory of production after revision of input and output indicators. From the view of reliability, the cost efficiency model had the largest correlation coefficient between the data of 2017 and 2018 (r=0.880, P<0.05).ConclusionsAfter refining the input and output indicators of the DEA model, the discrimination, validity, and reliability of the model are higher, and the results are more reasonable. Using indicators such as discrimination, validity, and reliability can measure the effectiveness of the DEA model, and then optimize the model by selecting different input and output indicators.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the reliability and validity of the instrument of clinical applicability of guidelines (version 2.0). MethodsThe experts of domestic medical institutions were investigated by questionnaire, and the instrument of clinical applicability of guidelines (version 2.0) were evaluated the guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of tinea mantis and tinea pedis (revised edition 2017) and the guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of cerebral hemorrhage in China (2019). Using Cronbach's α coefficient and Spearman-Brown coefficient to evaluate the inherent reliability and split-half reliability. The content validity was evaluated by calculating the content validity index of the item level and the adjusted Kappa value. The correlation coefficient between each item and the dimension and the hypothesis test were used to evaluate the convergent and discriminant validity. The structural validity was evaluated by using structural equation model to evaluate the structural validity of the tool. ResultsThe Cronbach's α coefficient and Spearman-Brown coefficient of the instrument of clinical applicability of guidelines (version 2.0) were both greater than 0.7, the content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) were more than 0.8, the success rates of convergent were 100%, and the success rates of discriminant validity calibration were 100% and 96%. In the second-order confirmatory factor analysis model, the χ2/ df were less than 3, the fitting index (CFI), the goodness of fit index (GFI) and the adjustment goodness of fit index (AGFI) were all greater than 0.9. The root mean square residual (RMR) were all less than 0.05, and approximate error root mean square (RMSEA) were less than 0.09. The P value of RESEA hypothesis test were more than 0.05. ConclusionThe instrument of clinical applicability of guidelines (version 2.0) has good reliability and validity, which can be further verified in practical application in the future.
