Dataset Information

Translation and Validation of the Korean Version of the Revised Health Care System Distrust Scale (HCSD-K) in Korean American Women.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Trust in the healthcare system is a major contributor for racial disparities in health and health care. We aimed to formally translate and cross-culturally adapt the Korean version of the Revised Health Care System Distrust (HCSD-K) scale with a sample of Korean American women and examine the psychometric properties of the HCSD-K scale.

Methods

Ten Korean American women participated in the cognitive interview. A self-administered questionnaire was completed by 196 Korean American women aged 50⁻74 years. Instrument adaptation was performed using committee-based translation and cognitive interviewing. Construct validity, convergent validity, and internal consistency were examined to evaluate the psychometric properties of the HCSD-K scale.

Results

The translated instrument was found to be semantically sound. A confirmatory factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure with an excellent fit. Convergent validity was supported by correlations between the HCSD-K scale and both the Perceived Discrimination in Health Care and Trust in Physician scales. Cronbach's alpha for the total HCSD-K was 0.83.

Conclusion

The nine-item HCSD-K scale demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity. It is an appropriate instrument for measuring healthcare system distrust in Korean American women. Further study is needed to confirm the study results in a gender-mixed Korean population.

SUBMITTER: Hong HC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6163931 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to translate the revised 17-item Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS17, 2017) into mandarin (simplified) Chinese and validate the Chinese version of DDS17 (C-DDS17, 2021) among adult patients with type 2 diabetes in China.MethodsA scale translation and cross-sectional validation study was conducted. The DDS17 was translated into mandarin (simplified) Chinese through a five-step process: authorization, forward translation, synthesis, back translation, and amendment. During this session, 59 patients assessed the understandability and readability of the translated scale. From June 7 to September 4, 2021, a cross-sectional study that adhered to the COSMIN checklist was conducted with 400 individuals with type 2 diabetes from three Class A tertiary comprehensive hospitals in Beijing, China. The content, construct, convergent, discriminant validity, and reliability (Cronbach's α coefficient and item-total correlation coefficients) of the C-DDS17 were evaluated. This study was a part of a project registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (no. ChiCTR2100047071).ResultsAmong the participants, 33.3% (133/400) of them experienced moderate to high diabetes distress. The content validity indices of the C-DDS17 equaled 1.00. The scale yielded a four-factor structure. The average variances extracted were 0.42-0.57, which was lower than squared correlations. Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.88 for the overall scale and ranged from 0.76 to 0.81 for sub-scales. Corrected item-total correlation coefficients ranged from 0.42 to 0.61. The eighth item ("Feeling that I am often failing with my diabetes routine") was better fit to physician distress than regimen distress but had little influence on the validation results.ConclusionsThe C-DDS17 is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing diabetes distress in patients with type 2 diabetes. It is a promising instrument for early identification and management of diabetes distress in clinical practice and trials.

Project description:ObjectivesThe American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale is among the most commonly used instruments for measuring outcome of treatment in patients who sustained a complex ankle or hindfoot injury. It consists of a patient-reported and a physician-reported part. A validated, Dutch version of this instrument is currently not available. The aim of this study was to translate the instrument into Dutch and to determine the measurement properties of the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale Dutch language version (DLV) in patients with a unilateral ankle fracture.SettingMulticentre (two Dutch hospitals), prospective observational study.ParticipantsIn total, 142 patients with a unilateral ankle fracture were included. Ten patients were lost to follow-up.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPatients completed the subjective (patient-reported) part of the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale-DLV. A physician or trained physician-assistant completed the physician-reported part. For comparison and evaluation of the measuring characteristics, the Foot Function Index and the Short Form-36 were completed by the patient. Descriptive statistics (including floor and ceiling effects), reliability (ie, internal consistency), construct validity, reproducibility (ie, test-retest reliability, agreement and smallest detectable change) and responsiveness were determined.ResultsThe AOFAS-DLV and its subscales showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's α >0.90). Construct validity and longitudinal validity were proven to be adequate (76.5% of predefined hypotheses were confirmed). Floor effects were not present. Ceiling effects were present from 6 months onwards, as expected. Responsiveness was adequate, with a smallest detectable change of 12.0 points.ConclusionsThe AOFAS-DLV is a reliable, valid and responsive measurement instrument for evaluating functional outcome in patients with a unilateral ankle fracture. This implies that the questionnaire is suitable to compare different treatment modalities within this population or to compare outcome across hospitals.Trial registrationThe Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5613; 05-jan-2016).