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.
ObjectivesTo compare and analyze existing pharmaceutical economic evaluations quality assessment instruments, and to provide suggestions on how to choose the most appropriate instrument.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect studies on existing pharmaceutical economic evaluations quality assessment instruments from inception to December, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and analyzed studies in terms of items, design methods, scopes and characteristics.ResultsTwelve original checklists with good reliability and validity were found. The first quality assessment method was designed in 1987 and the latest one was published in 2013. The number of checklist items ranged from 11 to 61.ConclusionThere is no consolidated method for assessing the quality of pharmaceutical economics evaluations. Evaluators can choose appropriate evaluation tools according to the purpose, type and operability of evaluation.
ObjectiveTo translate the King’s Brief Interstitial Lung Disease (K-BILD) to Chinese, so as to provide an well reliability and validity assessment instrument for health status of patients with interstitial lung disease.MethodsBrislin’s transition model, six expert’s panel and pre-survey were used for initial Chinese version of K-BILD. Items analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability were used for validity and reliability test with 122 respondents.ResultsTen-item Chinese version of K-BILD were proved to have great psychometric qualities, two factors were extracted by EFA, which could explain 63.35% of the total variance. Furthermore, the CFA demonstrates the fit indices of two-factors mode: χ2/df=0.797, RMSEA=0.000, NFI=0.848, IFI=1.048, CFI=1.000, TLI=1.071. Cronbach’s α and Guttman Split-half were 0.893 and 0.861, respectively. Besides, the test-retest reliability of the scale was 0.805.ConclusionThe Chinese version of K-BILD scale has good validity and reliability, which is applicable for health status assessment in patient with interstitial lung disease.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the reliability and validity of the Quality of Working Life Scale (QWL7-32).
MethodsThe QWL7-32 scale was used to survey 487 drilling workers. The presence of chronic diseases was regarded as an effector for evaluating physical health, and the result of SCL-90 measurement was regarded as an effector for evaluating psychological health. The reliability and validity of the scale were statistically analyzed.
ResultsThe results of the Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.713, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.920, and the Splithalf reliability coefficient was 0.942. The result of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the construct validity of scale was good, and the accumulative rate of 7 variances was 62.59%. The results of correlation analysis and t test showed that the validity of scale criterion was also good. In QWL7-32 scale, each dimension showed a good correlation with its relevant item but poor correlation with any other items.
ConclusionThe QWL7-32 has a good reliability and validity.
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 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.
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.
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 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.
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) measure attribute studies refer to studies conducted by investigators to validate the measurement attributes of PROM. The consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN), an international consensus standard for the selection of health measurement instruments, divides this attribute into three aspects: reliability, validity and responsiveness, and adds interpretability as an additional important feature for evaluating PROM. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the verification methods and principles of the three major measurement attributes in the COSMIN consensus, as well as the significance and direction of interpretability evaluation, and to provide international methodological experience and reference for the development of high-quality PROM psychometric attribute verification in China.
