Dataset Information

Reliability and validity of the Chinese CECA10 questionnaire for Chinese patients with condyloma acuminata.

ABSTRACT: Condyloma acuminata (CA) is a sexually transmitted disease that affects quality of life (QOL). CECA10 is an English-language questionnaire for assessing QOL in patients with CA, but there is no equivalent in China. This study aimed to develop a validated and reliable Chinese version of CECA10.The Chinese CECA10 was developed from the English version by forward translation, back translation, comparison with the original, cultural adjustments, and a pre-test (5 patients). The Chinese CECA10 and EuroQol Five Dimensions Three Level Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) was administered to patients with CA. Content validity (item/scale content validity indexes, I-CVI/S-CVI), test-retest reliability (intraclass coefficient, ICC), internal consistency (Cronbach ?), criterion validity (comparison with the Dermatology Life Quality Index, DLQL, using Spearman correlation analysis), construct validity (exploratory factor analysis), and discriminant validity (between subgroups based on number of warts, number of recurrences, or number of sites involved) were assessed.The Chinese CECA10 had good test-retest reliability (ICC?=?0.98, P?0.4. Discriminant validity was not high. The mean CECA10 and EQ-VAS scores of 211 patients with CA (28.19?±?7.16 years; 139 males) were 34.56?±?19.01 and 64.64?±?19.28, respectively.The Chinese CECA10 has good reliability and validity for evaluating the QOL of Chinese patients with CA.

SUBMITTER: Guo X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5851741 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reliability and validity of the Chinese CECA10 questionnaire for Chinese patients with condyloma acuminata.

Guo Xinying X Wu Xinjuan X Guo Aimin A Zhao Yanwei Y

Medicine 20180301 9

Condyloma acuminata (CA) is a sexually transmitted disease that affects quality of life (QOL). CECA10 is an English-language questionnaire for assessing QOL in patients with CA, but there is no equivalent in China. This study aimed to develop a validated and reliable Chinese version of CECA10.The Chinese CECA10 was developed from the English version by forward translation, back translation, comparison with the original, cultural adjustments, and a pre-test (5 patients). The Chinese CECA10 and Eu ...[more]

PMID: 29489693

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn England, prostate cancer patients report worse experience of care than patients with other cancers. However, no standard measure of patient experience of prostate cancer care is currently available. This paper describes an evaluation of the reliability, validity and acceptability of the PCQ-P, a newly developed instrument designed to measure patient experience of prostate cancer care.MethodsThe reliability, acceptability and validity of the PCQ-P were tested through a postal survey and interviews with patients. The PCQ-P was posted to 1087 prostate cancer patients varying in age, occupation, and overall health status, sampled from five hospitals in England. Nonresponders received one reminder. To assess criterion validity, 935 patients were also sent sections of the National Centre for Social Research Shortened Questionnaire; and to assess test-retest reliability, 296 patients who responded to the questionnaire were resent it a second time three weeks later. A subsample of 20 prostate cancer patients from one hospital took part in qualitative interviews to assess validity and acceptability of the PCQ-P. Acceptability to service providers was evaluated based on four hospitals' experiences of running a survey using the PCQ-P.ResultsQuestionnaires were returned by 865 patients (69.2%). Missing data was low across the sections, with the proportion of patients completing less than 50% of each section ranging from 4.5% to 6.9%. Across the sections of the questionnaire, internal consistency was moderate to high (Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.63 to 0.80), and test-retest stability was acceptable (intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.57 to 0.73). Findings on criterion validity were significant. Patient interviews indicated that the PCQ-P had high face validity and acceptability. Feedback from hospitals indicated that they found the questionnaire useful, and highlighted important considerations for its future use as part of quality improvement initiatives.ConclusionThe PCQ-P has been found to be acceptable to patients and service providers, and is ready for use for the measurement of patient experience in routine practice, service improvement programmes, and research.

Project description:OBJECTIVE: The causes of low back pain in China and Western countries are extremely different. We attempted to analyze the risk factors of low back pain in urban and rural patients under the dual economy with the simplified Chinese version of Roland-Morris disability questionnaire (SC-RMDQ) to demonstrate that SC-RMDQ could evaluate patients with low back pain arising from different causes. METHODS: Roland-Morris disability questionnaire was translated into SCRMDQ according to international guidelines for questionnaire adaptation. In this study, causes of low back pain of 187 outpatients and inpatients (99 urban patients and 88 rural patients) were analyzed. All patients underwent simplified Chinese version of Roland-Morris disability questionnaire (SC-RMDQ), simplified Chinese Oswestry disability index (SCODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS). Reliability was tested using reproducibility (intraclass coefficient of correlation--ICC) and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha). Validity was tested using Pearson correlation analysis. RESULTS: The leading causes for low back pain were sedentariness (38.4%) and vibration (18.1%) in urban patients and waist bending (48.9%) and spraining (25%) in rural patients. Although causes of low back pain in the two groups of population were completely different, SCRMDQ had high internal consistency (Cronbach's α value of 0.874 in urban patients and 0.883 in rural patients) and good reproducibility (ICC value of .952 in urban patients and 0.949 in rural patients, P<0.01). SCRMDQ also showed significant correlation with Simplified Chinese version of Oswestry disability index (SCODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in rural areas (SCRMDQ-SCODI r = 0.841; SCRMDQ-VAS: r = 0.685, P<0.01) and in urban areas (SCRMDQ-SCODI: r = 0.818, P<0.01; SCRMDQ-VAS: r = 0.666, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although causes of low back pain are completely different in rural and urban patients, SCRMDQ has a good reliability and validity, which is a reliable clinical method to evaluate disability of rural and urban patients.

Dataset Information

Reliability and validity of the Chinese CECA10 questionnaire for Chinese patients with condyloma acuminata.

Publications

Reliability and validity of the Chinese CECA10 questionnaire for Chinese patients with condyloma acuminata.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets