Dataset Information

Validity, reliability, and responsiveness to change of the "Osteoporosis and You" knowledge scale.

ABSTRACT: We studied the Osteoporosis and You knowledge scale in 7749 participants enrolled in a clinical trial. Results confirmed its psychometric properties in a diverse audience. Baseline scores were associated with better recall of bone mineral density test results at follow-up; however, the scale was not responsive to knowledge change.The goal of this study was to confirm the measurement properties of the Osteoporosis and You (O&Y) knowledge scale using classic test theory methods in the 7749 men and women participating in the Patient Activation After DXA Result Notification (PAADRN) randomized controlled trial. We hypothesized a simple factor structure that would reflect the four-factor model previously published.We conducted psychometric analyses which included item analysis, internal consistency reliability, construct validity using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA and CFA), comparing knowledge levels across pre-specified groups, and responsiveness to change.PAADRN participants were predominantly college educated, White females with low bone density, and a moderate level of 10-year fracture risk. EFA revealed four domains closely matching those in two previous reports. While overall scale reliability was minimally acceptable at 0.68, the reliabilities of the domain subscales were unacceptably low (0.59, 0.64, 0.45, and 0.36 for the Biological, Lifestyle, Consequences, and Prevention and Treatment subscales). CFA revealed the data fit the hypothesized model reasonably well with the items loading on their expected latent variable. The scale was not responsive to change, but although not significant, improved knowledge indicated better DXA result recall at 12 and 52 weeks.In the PAADRN population, the O&Y knowledge scale had psychometric properties similar to those previously reported. Over 12 and 52 weeks, participants did not demonstrate significant changes in knowledge, but those with higher knowledge at baseline were more likely to accurately recall their baseline DXA result.

SUBMITTER: Nguyen VT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5685910 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validity, reliability, and responsiveness to change of the "Osteoporosis and You" knowledge scale.

Nguyen V T VT Edmonds S W SW Lou Y Y Roblin D W DW Saag K G KG Cram P P Wolinsky F D FD

Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 20170907 12

We studied the Osteoporosis and You knowledge scale in 7749 participants enrolled in a clinical trial. Results confirmed its psychometric properties in a diverse audience. Baseline scores were associated with better recall of bone mineral density test results at follow-up; however, the scale was not responsive to knowledge change.<h4>Introduction</h4>The goal of this study was to confirm the measurement properties of the Osteoporosis and You (O&Y) knowledge scale using classic test theory method ...[more]

PMID: 28879445

Similar Datasets

Project description:The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) has been validated in high-income countries but not yet in low- and middle-income countries. We aimed to assess the reliability of the SRS in a community sample and its validity to discriminate between children with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in Vietnam. We used a three-phase study: piloting the translated SRS, reliability testing, and validation of the SRS in 158 Vietnamese caretakers and their children (ages 4-9 years). We examined reliability, validity and sensitivity, and specificity to ASD diagnosis. We applied receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis to determine optimal cutoff scores discriminating the children with ASD from those without ASD. We also assessed the performance of the SRS short form. We found that reliability was good with high internal consistency (0.88-0.89), test-retest reliability (0.82-0.83), sensitivity (93%), and specificity (98%) for identification of children with ASD. The ROC curves were similar for total raw score and total T-score, with the area under the curve (AUC) values reaching 0.98 and the optimal cutoff of 62 for raw scores and 60 for T-scores. The SRS short form also performed well in distinguishing children with ASD from children without ASD, with high AUC (0.98), sensitivity (90%), and specificity (98%) when using a raw score of 15 as a cutoff. In conclusion, the translated and culturally adapted SRS shows good reliability, validity, and sensitivity for identification of children with ASD in Vietnam. Both SRS long and short forms performed adequately to discriminate between children with and without ASD. Autism Res 2019, 00: 1-13. © 2019 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: Middle-income countries often lack validated tools to evaluate autism symptoms. The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) translated to Vietnamese was reliable and performed well to distinguish between children with and without autism spectrum disorder in Vietnam. The Vietnamese SRS, and translations of the tool to other languages with this methodology, may be useful in pediatric practice, potentially allowing providers to make more appropriate referrals for diagnostic evaluations and identify children for intervention to help them fulfill their developmental potential.

Project description:ObjectiveDyspnoea is a common, multifactorial source of functional impairment among patients with dcSSc. Our objective was to assess the reliability, construct validity and responsiveness to change of the Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) in patients with early dcSSc participating in a multicentre prospective study.MethodsAt enrolment and 1 year, patients completed the SGRQ (a multi-item instrument with four scales: symptoms, activity, impact and total), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for breathing and the HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and underwent 6 min walk distance and pulmonary function tests, physician and patient global health assessments and high-resolution CT (HRCT). We assessed internal consistency reliability using Cronbach's ?. For validity we examined the ability of the SGRQ to differentiate the presence vs absence of interstitial lung disease (ILD) on HRCT or restrictive lung disease and evaluated the 1 year responsiveness to change using pulmonary function tests and patient- and physician-reported anchors. Correlation coefficients of 0.24-0.36 were considered moderate and >0.37 was considered large.ResultsA total of 177 patients were evaluated. Reliability was satisfactory for all SGRQ scales (0.70-0.93). All scales showed large correlations with the VAS for breathing and diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide in the overall cohort and in the subgroup with ILD. Three of the four scales in the overall cohort and the total scale in the ILD subgroup showed moderate to large correlation with the HAQ-DI and the predicted forced vital capacity (r = 0.33-0.44). Each scale discriminated between the presence and absence of ILD and restrictive lung disease (P ? 0.0001-0.03). At follow-up, all scales were responsive to change using different anchors.ConclusionThe SGRQ has acceptable reliability, construct validity and responsiveness to change for use in a dcSSc population and differentiates between patients with and without ILD.

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there are no outcome measures assessing the ability of people with non-specific low back pain to self-manage their illness. Inspired by the 'Patient Enablement Instrument', we developed the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP). The aim of this study was to describe the development of the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP) and investigate content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, responsiveness and floor and ceiling effects.MethodsThe PEI-BP consists of 6 items that are rated on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale. Measurement properties were evaluated using the COSMIN taxonomy and were based on three cohorts from primary care with low back pain: The content validity cohort (N = 14) which participated in semi-structured interviews, the GLA:D® Back cohort (N = 272) and the test-retest cohort (N = 37) which both completed self-reported questionnaires. For construct validity and responsiveness, enablement was compared to disability (Oswestry Disability Index), back pain beliefs (Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire), fear avoidance (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire-physical activity), mental health (SF-36), educational level and number of previous episodes of low back pain.ResultsThe PEI-BP was found to have acceptable content validity, construct validity, reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error) and responsiveness. The Smallest Detectable Change was 10.1 points illustrating that a patient would have to change more than 1/6 of the scale range for it to be a true change. A skewed distribution towards the high scores were found at baseline indicating a potentially problematic ceiling effect in the current population.ConclusionsThe PEI-BP can be considered a valid and reliable tool to measure enablement on people seeking care for non-specific LBP. Further testing of the PEI-BP in populations with more severe LBP is recommended.Trial registrationNot applicable.

Dataset Information

Validity, reliability, and responsiveness to change of the "Osteoporosis and You" knowledge scale.

Publications

Validity, reliability, and responsiveness to change of the "Osteoporosis and You" knowledge scale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets