Purpose:The aim of this methodological study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale adapted to the Turkish community.Methods:The study sample was completed with 319 patients ...Purpose:The aim of this methodological study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale adapted to the Turkish community.Methods:The study sample was completed with 319 patients who had been diagnosed at least 1 year before and hospitalized in the Malatya Turgut Ozal Health Center and Malatya State Hospital in Turkey.A questionnaire that consists of items on sociodemographic characteristics,drug use and information about the disease of patients and the Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale were used for data collection in the study.In reliability analysis of the scale,the Cronbach'sαcoefficient was calculated and item analysis method was utilized.Factor analysis was used for the construct validity,and Principal Component Analysis and Varimax Rotation method were used for analyzing the factor structures.Results:According to data obtained in the study,item-total correlation of the items of the scale was found to be at an adequate level(0.297-0.803).The scale's Cronbach'sαreliability coefficient was found to be 0.86,and there was one factor that explains 52.38%of the total variance with an eigenvalue was greater than 1.0.As a result of the analysis,the factor loadings of the items of the scale were found to bebetween 0.59 and 0.81.Conclusion:Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale is a valid and reliable instrument for determining the self-efficacy of patients and providing a proper care.It can be suggested to investigate and evaluate the consistency of the scale by applying it to broader sample groups representing different socioeconomic levels.展开更多
Purpose:To evaluate the reliability and validity of the Frailty Phenotype(FP),Tilburg Frailty Indicator(TFI)and Frail Scale(FS)in elderly diabetic patients,and to provide a scientific basis for selecting appropriate f...Purpose:To evaluate the reliability and validity of the Frailty Phenotype(FP),Tilburg Frailty Indicator(TFI)and Frail Scale(FS)in elderly diabetic patients,and to provide a scientific basis for selecting appropriate frailty screening instruments for medical staff.Design:A cross-sectional study.Participants and Methods:A convenience sample of 169 elderly diabetic patients was selected from a diabetes special hospital in Tianjin,China.We assessed the reliability and validity of the full FP,TFI and FS as well as their domains.The structural validity of the scale was tested by Spearman correlation analysis of items,dimensions and total scores of scales.The predictive validity of FP,TFI and FS was evaluated by calculating the correlation coefficient between the total scores of FP,TFI and FS and the scores of diabetes specific quality of life scale(QSDL).We assessed the test-retest reliability of 17 elderly diabetic patients twice.Results:A total of 169 patients were included,with a mean age 66.53±7.24 years,and 53.8%were female.The prevalence of frailty was 23.1%according to FP,38.5%according to FS and 78.7%according to TFI with a mean score 6.86±3.05.The test-retest reliability of FP,TFI and FS were 0.915,0.942 and 0.956 respectively.The correlation coefficients between each item or dimension and its total frailty score were r=0.293~0.618,0.174~0.753 and 0.255~0.706 respectively(P<0.01).The total scores of the three frailty screening instruments were the strongest correlation with the physiological dimension of DSQL and the worst correlation of social relations.The area under the receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve for predicting the decline of quality of life of diabetic patients was 0.805,0.500 and 0.816,respectively.Conclusion:The test-retest reliability of FP,TFI and FS is good and the structural validity of TFI and the ability of predicting the decline of quality of life are better than those of FP and FS.Therefore,compared with the other two scales,the TFI is a reliable and valid instrument to assess frailty in elderly diabetic patients.展开更多
目的汉化老年人社会支持行为量表(The Social Support Behaviors scale,SSB),在中国老年人群中进行文化调适并检验其信效度。方法采用Brislin翻译模式进行量表的翻译、回译及文化调适。采用便利抽样方法选取548名老年人进行调查,以检验...目的汉化老年人社会支持行为量表(The Social Support Behaviors scale,SSB),在中国老年人群中进行文化调适并检验其信效度。方法采用Brislin翻译模式进行量表的翻译、回译及文化调适。采用便利抽样方法选取548名老年人进行调查,以检验中文版SSB量表的信效度。结果中文版SSB量表包括社会化、情感支持、建议或指导和实际援助4个维度,共31个条目。总量表的Cronbach′sα系数为0.927,各维度的Cronbach′sα系数分别为0.924、0.932、0.924和0.837;总量表的重测信度为0.782,各维度的重测信度分别为0.685、0.530、0.648、0.863。探索性因子分析提取4个因子,可解释的总变异为66.711%;验证性因子分析结果中χ^(2)/df=2.567,NFI=0.898,CFI=0.902,IFI=0.903,GFI=0.802,TLI=0.889,RMSEA=0.076,RMR=0.061;总量表的AVE值为0.628,各维度的AVE值区间为0.523~0.629;总量表的CR值为0.637,各维度的CR值区间为0.759~0.931;总量表得分与社会支持评价量表得分呈正相关(r=0.579,P<0.001)。结论中文版老年人社会支持行为量表具有良好的信效度,可作为我国老年人功能性社会支持的测量工具。展开更多
目的 汉化网络社会支持量表(the Online Social Support Scale,OSSS),并在老年人中测试其信效度。方法 根据WHO量表引进标准流程与Brislin翻译模型对英文版OSSS进行文化调适。以武汉市某三级甲等医院住院部、社区服务中心和公园的417名...目的 汉化网络社会支持量表(the Online Social Support Scale,OSSS),并在老年人中测试其信效度。方法 根据WHO量表引进标准流程与Brislin翻译模型对英文版OSSS进行文化调适。以武汉市某三级甲等医院住院部、社区服务中心和公园的417名老年人为研究对象,进行量表的信效度检验。结果 中文版OSSS包括4个维度,共19个条目。探索性因子分析提取的4个公因子累积方差贡献率为64.580%;验证性因子分析显示,χ~2/df=2.354,残差均方根(root mean square residual,RMR)=0.040,增值适配指数(iciemental fit index,IFI)=0.919,比较拟合指数(comparative fit index,CFI)=0.918,非标准适配指数(Trucker Lewis index,TLI)=0.901;量表总体的Cronbach's α系数为0.939,重测信度为0.936。结论 中文版OSSS信效度良好,可用于我国老年人在线社会支持状况的测量。展开更多
目的：修订癌症患者照顾者支持性照护需求量表（supportive care needs survey-partners and caregivers,SCNS-P＆C）并测量其信效度.方法通过专家咨询和预调查,对 SCNS-P＆C进行文化调试；通过调查363例癌症患者主要照顾者对量表进行...目的：修订癌症患者照顾者支持性照护需求量表（supportive care needs survey-partners and caregivers,SCNS-P＆C）并测量其信效度.方法通过专家咨询和预调查,对 SCNS-P＆C进行文化调试；通过调查363例癌症患者主要照顾者对量表进行项目修订；使用修订后量表调查449例癌症患者主要照顾者,对问卷进行信效度检测.结果修订后中文版 SCNS-P＆C各条目与总分的相关系数为0．497~0．728（P＜0．01）；探索性因子分析,提取6个公因子,分别为信息需求、健康照护需求、日常生活需求、经济需求、沟通/人际需求、心理/情绪需求,累积方差贡献率为62．05％；验证性因子分析χ2/df＝2．174,拟合优度指数（GFI）＝0．897,调整拟合优度指数（AGFI）＝0．869,比较拟合优度指数（CFI）＝0．910,近似误差均方根（RMSEA）＝0．066；各维度间及维度与总分间的相关系数为0．502~0．899（P＜0．01）；该量表总的内部一致性信度为0．961,各维度的内部一致性信度为0．690~0．900,总量表的分半信度为0．865,各维度的分半信度为0．691~0．870,总量表的重测信度为0．875.结论中文版 SCNS-P＆C具有良好的信效度,适合评估国内癌症患者照顾者的需求状况.展开更多
文摘Purpose:The aim of this methodological study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale adapted to the Turkish community.Methods:The study sample was completed with 319 patients who had been diagnosed at least 1 year before and hospitalized in the Malatya Turgut Ozal Health Center and Malatya State Hospital in Turkey.A questionnaire that consists of items on sociodemographic characteristics,drug use and information about the disease of patients and the Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale were used for data collection in the study.In reliability analysis of the scale,the Cronbach'sαcoefficient was calculated and item analysis method was utilized.Factor analysis was used for the construct validity,and Principal Component Analysis and Varimax Rotation method were used for analyzing the factor structures.Results:According to data obtained in the study,item-total correlation of the items of the scale was found to be at an adequate level(0.297-0.803).The scale's Cronbach'sαreliability coefficient was found to be 0.86,and there was one factor that explains 52.38%of the total variance with an eigenvalue was greater than 1.0.As a result of the analysis,the factor loadings of the items of the scale were found to bebetween 0.59 and 0.81.Conclusion:Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale is a valid and reliable instrument for determining the self-efficacy of patients and providing a proper care.It can be suggested to investigate and evaluate the consistency of the scale by applying it to broader sample groups representing different socioeconomic levels.
基金supported by Research and Innovation Project of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine in 2020 with Grant No.YJSKC-20201037Tianjin College Students'Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program with Grant No.201910063045.
文摘Purpose:To evaluate the reliability and validity of the Frailty Phenotype(FP),Tilburg Frailty Indicator(TFI)and Frail Scale(FS)in elderly diabetic patients,and to provide a scientific basis for selecting appropriate frailty screening instruments for medical staff.Design:A cross-sectional study.Participants and Methods:A convenience sample of 169 elderly diabetic patients was selected from a diabetes special hospital in Tianjin,China.We assessed the reliability and validity of the full FP,TFI and FS as well as their domains.The structural validity of the scale was tested by Spearman correlation analysis of items,dimensions and total scores of scales.The predictive validity of FP,TFI and FS was evaluated by calculating the correlation coefficient between the total scores of FP,TFI and FS and the scores of diabetes specific quality of life scale(QSDL).We assessed the test-retest reliability of 17 elderly diabetic patients twice.Results:A total of 169 patients were included,with a mean age 66.53±7.24 years,and 53.8%were female.The prevalence of frailty was 23.1%according to FP,38.5%according to FS and 78.7%according to TFI with a mean score 6.86±3.05.The test-retest reliability of FP,TFI and FS were 0.915,0.942 and 0.956 respectively.The correlation coefficients between each item or dimension and its total frailty score were r=0.293~0.618,0.174~0.753 and 0.255~0.706 respectively(P<0.01).The total scores of the three frailty screening instruments were the strongest correlation with the physiological dimension of DSQL and the worst correlation of social relations.The area under the receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve for predicting the decline of quality of life of diabetic patients was 0.805,0.500 and 0.816,respectively.Conclusion:The test-retest reliability of FP,TFI and FS is good and the structural validity of TFI and the ability of predicting the decline of quality of life are better than those of FP and FS.Therefore,compared with the other two scales,the TFI is a reliable and valid instrument to assess frailty in elderly diabetic patients.
文摘目的汉化老年人社会支持行为量表(The Social Support Behaviors scale,SSB),在中国老年人群中进行文化调适并检验其信效度。方法采用Brislin翻译模式进行量表的翻译、回译及文化调适。采用便利抽样方法选取548名老年人进行调查,以检验中文版SSB量表的信效度。结果中文版SSB量表包括社会化、情感支持、建议或指导和实际援助4个维度,共31个条目。总量表的Cronbach′sα系数为0.927,各维度的Cronbach′sα系数分别为0.924、0.932、0.924和0.837;总量表的重测信度为0.782,各维度的重测信度分别为0.685、0.530、0.648、0.863。探索性因子分析提取4个因子,可解释的总变异为66.711%;验证性因子分析结果中χ^(2)/df=2.567,NFI=0.898,CFI=0.902,IFI=0.903,GFI=0.802,TLI=0.889,RMSEA=0.076,RMR=0.061;总量表的AVE值为0.628,各维度的AVE值区间为0.523~0.629;总量表的CR值为0.637,各维度的CR值区间为0.759~0.931;总量表得分与社会支持评价量表得分呈正相关(r=0.579,P<0.001)。结论中文版老年人社会支持行为量表具有良好的信效度,可作为我国老年人功能性社会支持的测量工具。
文摘目的 汉化网络社会支持量表(the Online Social Support Scale,OSSS),并在老年人中测试其信效度。方法 根据WHO量表引进标准流程与Brislin翻译模型对英文版OSSS进行文化调适。以武汉市某三级甲等医院住院部、社区服务中心和公园的417名老年人为研究对象,进行量表的信效度检验。结果 中文版OSSS包括4个维度,共19个条目。探索性因子分析提取的4个公因子累积方差贡献率为64.580%;验证性因子分析显示,χ~2/df=2.354,残差均方根(root mean square residual,RMR)=0.040,增值适配指数(iciemental fit index,IFI)=0.919,比较拟合指数(comparative fit index,CFI)=0.918,非标准适配指数(Trucker Lewis index,TLI)=0.901;量表总体的Cronbach's α系数为0.939,重测信度为0.936。结论 中文版OSSS信效度良好,可用于我国老年人在线社会支持状况的测量。
文摘目的：修订癌症患者照顾者支持性照护需求量表（supportive care needs survey-partners and caregivers,SCNS-P＆C）并测量其信效度.方法通过专家咨询和预调查,对 SCNS-P＆C进行文化调试；通过调查363例癌症患者主要照顾者对量表进行项目修订；使用修订后量表调查449例癌症患者主要照顾者,对问卷进行信效度检测.结果修订后中文版 SCNS-P＆C各条目与总分的相关系数为0．497~0．728（P＜0．01）；探索性因子分析,提取6个公因子,分别为信息需求、健康照护需求、日常生活需求、经济需求、沟通/人际需求、心理/情绪需求,累积方差贡献率为62．05％；验证性因子分析χ2/df＝2．174,拟合优度指数（GFI）＝0．897,调整拟合优度指数（AGFI）＝0．869,比较拟合优度指数（CFI）＝0．910,近似误差均方根（RMSEA）＝0．066；各维度间及维度与总分间的相关系数为0．502~0．899（P＜0．01）；该量表总的内部一致性信度为0．961,各维度的内部一致性信度为0．690~0．900,总量表的分半信度为0．865,各维度的分半信度为0．691~0．870,总量表的重测信度为0．875.结论中文版 SCNS-P＆C具有良好的信效度,适合评估国内癌症患者照顾者的需求状况.
