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.
Objective To verify the reliability and validity of a self-developed satisfaction evaluation questionnaire for outpatient department employees in public hospitals, and to provide suitable tools for conducting such surveys. Methods Two anonymous surveys were conducted on all employees of the Outpatient Department of West China Hospital of Sichuan University in July 2019 and November 2021, respectively. Questionnaire items were screened using methods such as item distribution, coefficient of variation, and decision value, and the reliability and validity of the questionnaire were evaluated using Spearman-Brown coefficient and Cronbach’s α coefficient, exploratory factor analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis. Results The final questionnaire retained 14 items, which could be divided into two dimensions: work conditions and interpersonal environment, and the overall fit index of structural equation model were as follows: χ2/ν=6.957, the standardized root mean square residual was 0.061, the root mean square error of approximation was 0.147, the goodness-of-fit index was 0.796, the adjusted goodness-of-fit index was 0.719, the normed fit index was 0.849, the relative fit index was 0.819, the incremental fit index was 0.868, the Tucker-Lewis Index was 0.841, and the comparative fit index was 0.867. The combined reliability of the two factors in the questionnaire was 0.94 and 0.91, respectively. The average variance extraction was 0.67 and 0.76, respectively, and the square root of the average variance extraction was 0.82 and 0.87, respectively, both of which were greater than the correlation coefficient of 0.71 between the two factors. The Spearman-Brown coefficient of the final questionnaire was 0.913, and the Cronbach’s α coefficients for the overall and two dimensions were 0.953, 0.937, and 0.910, respectively. Conclusion The reliability and validity of the satisfaction evaluation questionnaire for outpatient department employees in public hospitals are good and the questionnaire can be applied to practical surveys.
Objective To evaluate the reliability and validity of the three-dimensional motion capture analysis system COFT-Motion? in evaluating the active range of motion of upper limbs in healthy subjects, and provide objective basis for its clinical application. Methods From January to March 2022, healthy subjects were publicly recruited for enrollment. The evaluator applied the three-dimensional motion capture analysis system COFT-Motion? and angle ruler to evaluate the active range of motion of the shoulder joint (flexion, extension, adduction, abduction) and elbow joint (flexion, extension) in healthy subjects. Pearson correlation analysis was used to evaluate validity, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate reliability. Results There was a positive correlation between the measurements of COFT-Motion? and the angle ruler of the active range of motion of upper limbs in healthy subjects. The Pearson correlation coefficients for active range of motion of the shoulder joint (flexion, extension, adduction, abduction) and elbow joint (flexion, extension) were 0.913, 0.964, 0.961, 0.941, 0.864, and 0.919, respectively (P<0.05). The results of using COFT-Motion? by different evaluators to evaluate the active range of motion of healthy subjects’ shoulder joints (flexion, extension, adduction, abduction) and elbow joints (flexion, extension) showed that the ICC values were 0.892, 0.942, 0.961, 0.988, 0.989, and 0.928, respectively (P<0.05). The results of repeated evaluations by the same evaluator showed that the ICC values were 0.795, 0.916, 0.900, 0.868, 0.918, and 0.911, respectively (P<0.05). Conclusion The application of the three-dimensional motion capture analysis system COFT-Motion? in healthy subjects has good validity and reliability. However, due to the limited sample size and subject of the study, further promotion and application of the system still need to be further explored.
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.
ObjectiveBy establishing a set of evaluation system for thoracoscopic clinical function and applicability, to evaluate and compare the advantages and disadvantages of different brands of thoracoscopes, and to provide some suggestions for the innovation and upgrade of thoracoscopes, especially for the domestic thoracoscopes.MethodsThe project coordination team initially formulated the evaluation index system for the clinical function and applicability of thoracoscope by querying literature and brainstorming. The Delphi expert consultation method was used to distribute questionnaires to the selected experts. Experts provided scores which were based on the importance of each indicator, and clarified the basis of their judgment and the familiarity with the evaluation indicators. After two rounds of screening by Delphi method, a thoracoscopic clinical function and applicability satisfactory questionnaire was formed. The appropriate sample for pre-investigation was selected, and the reliability and validity were tested. The index composition was adjusted based on the results of the test to form a final evaluation scale.ResultsThe project coordination team initially formulated 24 thoracoscope-related evaluation indicators. After two rounds of experts consultation, the item "brightness adjustment" was deleted without any additional entries. The positive coefficients of the experts in the first round and the second round were 100.0% and 80.0%, respectively. The two rounds of authoritative coefficients were 0.86 and 0.90, and the coordination coefficients were 0.272 (P<0.001) and 0.523 (P<0.001), respectively. A total of 140 questionnaires were issued in this pre-investigation. The recovery rate was 100.0% and the effective rate was 90.0%. The Cronbach's α value of the scale was 0.936, and the Spearman-Brown split-half reliability coefficient was 0.972. The factor analysis finally extracted 3 common factors. The total variance of the cumulative interpretation was 70.9%. The three common factors were named "operation related", "image related" and "device related".ConclusionThe evaluation index system developed in this study has good reliability and validity, and can be used as a tool to evaluate the clinical function and applicability of thoracoscopes.
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 develop a patient satisfaction evaluation scale for day surgery and test its reliability and validity, so as to provide a scientific and effective tool for day surgery patient satisfaction assessment.MethodsThe literature review method was used to form an entry pool, and the initial version of the scale was formed in conjunction with the expert review method. And then a preliminary survey was conducted to obtain the tentative version of the scale. Finally, 290 day surgery patients discharged between June 15th and July 15th, 2019 were selected to accomplish a survey to check the reliability and validity of the scale.ResultsFinally, a day surgery patient satisfaction evaluation scale was formed, containing 3 stages (pre-hospital, hospitalization, and postdischarge follow-up), 3 dimensions (medical staff evaluation, medical service evaluation, and environment and process evaluation), and 40 items. After the formal survey, the overall Cronbach’s α coefficient of the scale was 0.980, the Spearman-Brown coefficient was 0.933, the Guttman’s half-coefficient was 0.932, and the content validity was 0.87-1.00.ConclusionThe day surgery patient satisfaction evaluation scale was proven good reliability and validity, which can be used as a measurement tool for day surgery patients and applied to clinical practice.
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.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the reliability and validity on quality criteria for clinical nursing practice guidelines.MethodsFive appraisers were included to assess two clinical nursing practice guidelines using the quality criteria for clinical nursing practice guidelines and AGREE Ⅱ. ICC and coefficient of consistency were adopted to assess the reliability and validity of the appraisal tools.ResultsICC for two guidelines of AIDS and infusion by the quality criteria for clinical nursing practice guidelines were 0.979 and 0.890. ICC for two guidelines of AIDS and infusion by AGREE Ⅱ were 0.957 and 0.887. The coefficient of consistency for guidelines of AIDS and infusion by the two appraisal tools were 0.880 and 0.886, both were highly consistent.ConclusionsThe quality criteria for clinical nursing practice guidelines has good reliability and validity and can be used as appraisal tool for quality evaluation of clinical nursing practice guidelines. It is strongly recommended that the users should understand the appraisal tool or should be trained to decrease the bias.