期刊文献+

甲状腺癌治疗偏好保护动机信念量表的编制及信效度检验 被引量:1

Compile of protection motivation belief scale of thyroid cancer treatment preference and its reliability and validity test
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的编制甲状腺癌治疗偏好保护动机信念量表并检验其信效度。方法以保护动机理论为基础,通过文献回顾、小组讨论、专家咨询和预调查确定量表条目。采用方便抽样法抽取2021年1-8月在该院健康管理中心进行健康体检的年龄大于或等于18岁、有智能手机、意识清楚的自愿参与者在假定患有甲状腺癌的条件下进行量表测定。应用SAS9.4、AMOS24.0软件进行量表信效度检验。结果甲状腺癌治疗偏好保护动机信念量表包括严重性、易感性、内外部奖励、反应效能、行为代价和自我效能6个维度15个条目。量表的Cronbach′sα系数为0.761,各维度的Cronbach′sα系数为0.553~0.803。内容效度中各条目的条目内容效度指数(I-CVI)为0.750~1.000,全体一致性量表内容效度指数(S-CVI/UA)为0.800,总量表内容效度指数(S-CVI/Ave)为0.967。结构效度中探索性因子分析提取特征根大于1的6个公因子,累积方差贡献率为72.62%,各条目因子载荷为0.746~0.885。验证性因子分析显示比较拟合指数(CFI)为0.932,拟合优度指数(GFI)为0.954,调整拟合优度指数(AGFI)为0.926,规范拟合指数(NFI)为0.977,相对拟合指数(RFI)为0.969,近似误差均方根指数(RMSEA)为0.063,均达到推荐标准。区分效度中各维度与量表总分明显相关(r=0.327~0.667,P<0.05),各维度之间的相关性低于各维度与总分的相关性。结论甲状腺癌治疗偏好保护动机信念量表具有良好的信效度,可用于甲状腺癌治疗偏好的评估,以及治疗决策行为的分析和预测。 Objective To compile a protection motivation belief scale of thyroid cancer treatment preference,and to test its reliability and validity.Methods Based on the protection motivation theory,the scale items were determined through the literature review,group discussion,expert consultation and pre-investigation.The voluntary participants undergoing healthy physical examination in the Health Management Center of this hospital during January to August 2021,age≥18 years old,having smartphone,clear consciousness,were extracted by convenience sampling method to conduct the scale measurement in the hypothetical condition of sufferring from thyroid cancer.The SAS 9.4 and AMOS 24.0 softwares were used for conducting the test of scale’s reliability and validity.Results The protection motivation belief scale of thyroid cancer treatment preference contained 6 dimensions such as severity,susceptibility,internal and external award,response efficiency,behavior costs and self-efficacy,and 15 items.Thel Cronbach’sαcoefficients of the scale was 0.761,and ranged 0.553-0.803 for each dimension.The item-level content validity index(I-CVI)in each item of the content validity ranged 0.750-1.000.The consistent CVI(S-CVI/UA)was 0.800 and the average CVI(S-CVI/Ave)was 0.967.Six common factors with characteristic root>1.0 were extracted by the exploratory factor analysis,the cumulative variance contribution rate was 72.62%.The factor loading of each item ranged 0.746-0.885.The confirmatory factor analysis showed that CFI was 0.932,GFI was 0.954,AGFI was 0.926,NFI was 0.977,RFI was 0.969,RMSEA was 0.063,all reached the recommended standard.In the discrimination validity,each dimension had significant correlation with the scale total score(r=0.327-0.667,P<0.05),the correlation among various dimensions was lower than the correlation between various dimensions and the total score.Conclusion The protection motivation belief scale of thyroid cancer treatment preference has good reliability and validity,which can be used to evaluate the treatment preference of thyroid cancer,and to analyzed and predict the treatment decision-making behavior.
作者 何佳桐 曹毅 于婵 岳妍 周庆菊 李斌 HE Jiatong;CAO Yi;YU Chan;YUE Yan;ZHOU Qingju;LI Bin(Health Management Center,Chongqing Municipal People’s Hospital,Chongqing 401121,China)
出处 《重庆医学》 CAS 2022年第13期2300-2305,2310,共7页 Chongqing medicine
基金 重庆市科卫联合医学科研项目(2021MSXM278)。
关键词 甲状腺癌 治疗偏好 保护动机理论 信度 效度 thyroid cancer treatment preference protection motivation theory reliability validity
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献51

  • 1曾五一,黄炳艺.调查问卷的可信度和有效度分析[J].统计与信息论坛,2005,20(6):11-15. 被引量:357
  • 2方晓义,蔺秀云,林丹华,李晓铭,邓林园.保护动机对农村流动人口性病艾滋病高危性行为的预测[J].心理学报,2006,38(6):877-885. 被引量:21
  • 3Wynd CA,Schmidt B,Schaefer MA.Two quantitative approachesfor estimating content validity[J].Western J Nurs Res,2003,25(5):508–518.
  • 4Lindell MK,Brandt CJ,Whitney DJ.A revised index of interrateragreement for multi-item ratings of a single target[J].Appl PsycholMeasurem,1999,23(2):127–135.
  • 5Lawshe CH.A quantitative approach to content validity[J].Personne Psychol,1975,28(4):563–575.
  • 6Hambleton RK,Swaminathan H,Algina J,et al.Criterion-referencedtesting and measurement:Review of technical issues anddevelopments[J].Rev Educat Res,1978,48(1):11–22.
  • 7Martuza VR.Applying norm-referenced and criterion-referenced measurement in education[M].Boston:Allyn andBacon,1977:275–293.
  • 8Lynn MR.Determination and quantification of content validity[J].Nursing Res,1986,35(6):382–385.
  • 9Davis LL.Instrument review:Getting the most from your panel ofexperts[J].Appl Nurs Res,1992,5(4):194–197.
  • 10Polit DF,Beck CT.The content validity index:are you sure youknow what’s being reported?critique and recommendations[J].Res Nurs Health,2006,29(5):489–497.

共引文献1933

同被引文献13

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部