Dataset Information

The Possibilities for Activity Scale (PActS): Development, validity, and reliability.

ABSTRACT: Laliberte Rudman proposed the concept of occupational possibilities to represent what older adults feel they "should be" and "could be" doing.This study aimed to develop and validate a measure of perceived occupational possibilities: the Possibilities for Activity Scale (PActS).Two factors of the PActS, activity expectations and activity self-efficacy, were operationalized in a 14-item instrument. The instrument was then evaluated with a sample of older adults diagnosed with cancer (n = 179).The PActS demonstrated promising internal consistency reliability (stratified coefficient ? = .77) and construct-related (r = .58; p < .0001), structural (chi-square = 61.57; CFI = .97; RMSEA = .05; TLI = .96; NFL = .91) and known-groups validity.The PActS appears to be a useful measure of internalized occupational possibilities for participation in activity for older adults with cancer. This scale can enhance the measurement of participation in activity by evaluating the perceptions of occupational possibilities.

SUBMITTER: Pergolotti M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4992939 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Possibilities for Activity Scale (PActS): Development, validity, and reliability.

Pergolotti Mackenzi M Cutchin Malcolm P MP

Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie 20150401 2

<h4>Background</h4>Laliberte Rudman proposed the concept of occupational possibilities to represent what older adults feel they "should be" and "could be" doing.<h4>Purpose</h4>This study aimed to develop and validate a measure of perceived occupational possibilities: the Possibilities for Activity Scale (PActS).<h4>Method</h4>Two factors of the PActS, activity expectations and activity self-efficacy, were operationalized in a 14-item instrument. The instrument was then evaluated with a sample o ...[more]

PMID: 26281432

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Functional or quality of life questionnaires are important tools in clinical investigations. The Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale and Tegner Activity Scale are knee-specific questionnaires that are widely used to assess knee function. Purpose: To translate both questionnaires into Thai and to assess the validity and reliability of the Thai versions of the Lysholm and adjusted Tegner scales. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The Lysholm and Tegner scales were translated into Thai by using the forward-backward translation protocol. Because cultural modifications were made to the sports used to measure activity on the Tegner scale, the authors of this study refer to the Thai version as the “Thai adjusted Tegner scale.” The reliability and validity of the translated scales were evaluated by obtaining the responses of 60 consecutive patients (mean age, 40.5 years; 34 male, 26 female); the patients also completed the Thai version of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF). Criterion validity was tested by correlating the scores from both translated questionnaires with those from the Thai IKDC-SKF, while reliability was assessed by measuring test-retest reliability and internal consistency. Results: The Thai Lysholm scale showed a strong correlation with the Thai IKDC-SKF (r = 0.89), while the Thai adjusted Tegner scale showed a moderate correlation with the Thai IKDC-SKF (r = 0.60). The intrarater and test-retest reliability measures were excellent for the Thai Lysholm (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.94 and 0.98, respectively) and moderate to good for the Thai adjusted Tegner (ICC, 0.73 and 0.86, respectively). The internal consistency for the Thai Lysholm was acceptable at all the time points (Cronbach alpha, 0.71-0.73). Conclusion: The Thai Lysholm and Thai adjusted Tegner scales adequately retained the characteristics of the original versions. They can be considered reliable instruments for Thai patients with knee-related problems.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measures support health professionals in evaluating the results of clinical research and practice. The Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale (CNFDS) has shown promising measurement properties to measure disability in patients with neck pain, but an Italian version of this questionnaire is not available. The objective of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the CNFDS into Italian (CNFDS-I), and to assess its validity and reliability in patients with neck pain. METHODS:The CNFDS-I was developed according to well-established guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of patient-reported outcome measures. A cross-sectional clinimetric study was conducted to evaluate its validity and reliability. Patients with chronic neck pain (pain >?3 months) participated in this study. The following measurement properties (defined by the COSMIN initiative) were assessed: structural validity (exploratory factor analysis), internal consistency (Cronbach's ?), construct validity [by testing hypotheses on expected correlations with the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire (NBQ), and pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)]. Test-retest reliability [Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for agreement (ICCagreement)], and measurement error [Smallest Detectable Change (SDC)] were also assessed in 50 clinically stable patients. Floor/ceiling effects and acceptability were calculated. RESULTS:One-hundred and sixty-two patients (mean age?=?47.9?±?14.5 years, 70% female) were included. The CNFDS-I exhibited sufficient unidimensionality (one factor explained 83% of the variability) and internal consistency (??=?0.83). Construct validity was sufficient as all correlations with the other questionnaires were as expected (r?=?0.846 with NDI, r?=?0.708 with NBQ, r?=?0.570 with VAS). Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICCagreement?=?0.99, 95% CI from 0.995 to 0.999), while measurement error was equal to 8.31 scale points (27% scale range). No floor/ceiling effects were detected. The average time for filling the questionnaire was two minutes. CONCLUSIONS:The CNFDS-I proved to be a valid and reliable outcome measure to assess disability in patients with chronic neck pain. Head-to-head comparison studies on the CNFDS-I measurement properties against other disability measures for neck pain (e.g. NDI and NBQ) are required to determine the relative merits of these different measures.

Project description:BackgroundIt is unlikely that applications of artificial intelligence (AI) will completely replace physicians. However, it is very likely that AI applications will acquire many of their roles and generate new tasks in medical care. To be ready for new roles and tasks, medical students and physicians will need to understand the fundamentals of AI and data science, mathematical concepts, and related ethical and medico-legal issues in addition with the standard medical principles. Nevertheless, there is no valid and reliable instrument available in the literature to measure medical AI readiness. In this study, we have described the development of a valid and reliable psychometric measurement tool for the assessment of the perceived readiness of medical students on AI technologies and its applications in medicine.MethodsTo define medical students' required competencies on AI, a diverse set of experts' opinions were obtained by a qualitative method and were used as a theoretical framework, while creating the item pool of the scale. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) were applied.ResultsA total of 568 medical students during the EFA phase and 329 medical students during the CFA phase, enrolled in two different public universities in Turkey participated in this study. The initial 27-items finalized with a 22-items scale in a four-factor structure (cognition, ability, vision, and ethics), which explains 50.9% cumulative variance that resulted from the EFA. Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient was 0.87. CFA indicated appropriate fit of the four-factor model (?2/df?=?3.81, RMSEA?=?0.094, SRMR?=?0.057, CFI?=?0.938, and NNFI (TLI)?=?0.928). These values showed that the four-factor model has construct validity.ConclusionsThe newly developed Medical Artificial Intelligence Readiness Scale for Medical Students (MAIRS-MS) was found to be valid and reliable tool for evaluation and monitoring of perceived readiness levels of medical students on AI technologies and applications. Medical schools may follow 'a physician training perspective that is compatible with AI in medicine' to their curricula by using MAIRS-MS. This scale could be benefitted by medical and health science education institutions as a valuable curriculum development tool with its learner needs assessment and participants' end-course perceived readiness opportunities.

Dataset Information

The Possibilities for Activity Scale (PActS): Development, validity, and reliability.

Publications

The Possibilities for Activity Scale (PActS): Development, validity, and reliability.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets