Objective To develop an evaluation tool for the screening of high risk population for oral complications in critically ill patients, which can be performed accurately and scientifically. Methods Basing on the related foreign oral assessment scale, combined with the method of brainstorming, expert consultation, method of clinical status and so on, the item pool of the assessment scale was determined. Five nursing experts and two oral experts assessed the content validity and 50 ICU nurses were tested. Then, the screening accuracy of the assessment scale was proved by application in 100 critically ill patients selected randomly. Results The Cronbach’s a coefficient of final version of the High Risk Assessment Scale for Oral Complications in Critically Ill Patients (including seven parts contents of oral health assessment and oral pH value test) was 0.815, the content validity index (Sr-CVI/Ave) was 0.932. The results of 50 nurses to the 91.2% assessment items of the assessment scale were very important and important. For screening related indicators of oral complications in high-risk patients, the sensitivity of the assessment scale was 97.53%, the specificity was 94.11%, the positive predictive value was 98.75%, the negative predictive value was 88.89%, and the crude agreement was 95%. Conclusion There are good reliability, validity and a high accuracy of screening test in the High Risk Assessment Scale for Oral Complications in Critically Ill Patients. It can be used for screening patients at high risk for oral complications in critically ill patients, and help clinical nurses to complete the oral health status of the critically ill patients quickly.
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.
Objective To primarily test the reliability and validity of the Kashin-Beck Disease (KBD) affected big joints function assessing system for adult Tibetans in Rangtang County. Method From June to July 2009, 142 KBD patients were investigated with the function assessing system in Rangtang County of Ngawa. Cronbach’s α coefficient was calculated to estimate internal consistency reliability. Pearson’s r for the correlation of the items with the total score of the scale was computed to test the internal validity. Principal component factor analysis with varimax rotation analysis was conducted to explore construct validity. Result Both the response and complete rates of the scale were 100%. The time for completing the scale was 7.8±3.4 minutes. Cronbach’s α was 0.857, which revealed satisfactory internal consistency reliability. Pearson correlation analysis revealed significant correlation between the scores of each item and the total score of the scale (Plt;0.05). Pearson’s r value of each item was more than 0.4, only except the items of “sitting with legs crossed” and “standing at attention”. The principal factor analysis extracted three latent factors explaining 68.1% of the variation together. The latent factors weights of the items were over 0.4 except the items of “standing at attention”, "taking food” and “wiping after defecation”. Conclusion The reliability and validity of KBD affected big joints function assessing system for adult Tibetans in Rangtang County was good in this primary test, the function assessing system has to be widely applied and further assessed among Tibetans suffered with KBD, in order to provide a standard evaluation criterion in KBD integrate control.
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.
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 evaluate the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) in preoperative anxiety in patients with local anesthesia. Methods From May to December 2020, a convenient sampling method was used to conduct an APAIS questionnaire survey on patients undergoing percutaneous renal biopsy in the Department of Nephrology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, and the reliability and validity of the scale were analyzed. ResultsA total of 460 questionnaires were distributed and 444 valid questionnaires were returned, with a valid response rate of 96.5%. The Cronbach α of APAIS was 0.896, the Guttman split-half reliability was 0.811, and the content validity index was 0.891. The model fit was 12.122 for the chi-square fit index/degree of freedom, 0.916 for the goodness-of-fit index, 0.902 for the value-added fit index, 0.079 for the root mean square error of approximation, and 0.946 for the comparative fit index. The APAIS anxiety subscale score was positively correlated with the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale score (r=0.518, P<0.001). Conclusion The APAIS has good reliability and validity for evaluating the level of preoperative anxiety in patients with local anesthesia, but the application of the scale in other conditions requires further testing.
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.
The COSMIN-RoB checklist includes three sections with a total of 10 boxes, which is used to evaluate risk of bias of studies on content validity, internal structure, and other measurement properties. COSMIN classifies reliability, measurement error, criteria validity, hypothesis testing for construct validity, and responsiveness as other measurement properties, which primarily focus on the quality of the (sub)scale as a whole, rather than on the item level. Among the five measurement properties, reliability, measurement error and criteria validity are the most widely used in the studies. Therefore, this paper aims to interpret COSMIN-RoB checklist with examples to guide researchers to evaluate the risk of bias of the studies on reliability, measurement error and criteria validity of PROMs.
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.