Construct Validity and Reliability of the Work Environment Assessment Instrument WE-10.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: de Barros Ahrens R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7600521 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Construct Validity and Reliability of the Work Environment Assessment Instrument WE-10.
de Barros Ahrens Rudy R da Silva Lirani Luciana L de Francisco Antonio Carlos AC
International journal of environmental research and public health 20201009 20
The purpose of this study was to validate the construct and reliability of an instrument to assess the work environment as a single tool based on quality of life (QL), quality of work life (QWL), and organizational climate (OC). The methodology tested the construct validity through Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and reliability through Cronbach's alpha. The EFA returned a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value of 0.917; which demonstrated that the data were adequate for the factor analysis; and a sig ...[more]
Similar Datasets
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.
| S-EPMC8033700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Duchenne Video Assessment (DVA) assesses quality of movement as an indication of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) disease severity. Caregivers video record patients performing home-based movement tasks using a mobile application, and physical therapists (PTs) rate the videos using scorecards with prespecified compensatory movement criteria. Reliability and construct validity of the DVA were tested using video and Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) data from patients with DMD and healthy controls from a separate study.MethodsFifteen PTs were trained and certified as DVA raters. All raters scored videos of five subjects performing each movement task; nine raters rescored the same videos four weeks later. Three raters scored videos from an average of 25 subjects for each movement task. Aggregate scores were used to test construct validity. An expert DMD clinician assigned each video to a severity group for known-groups analyses. Differences between rater scores across severity groups were tested and correlations between DVA and PODCI scores were calculated.ResultsInter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) between all 15 raters ranged from 0.70 to 0.97 for all movement tasks. Mean intra-rater reliability ICC for nine raters ranged from 0.82 to 0.98 for all movement tasks. There were statistically significant differences between known severity groups for all movement tasks. The DVA correlated strongly with related PODCI constructs of physical function and weakly with unrelated constructs.DiscussionThe DVA was found to be a reliable and valid tool for measuring quality of movement as an indication of disease severity.
| S-EPMC8361683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Proper transfer technique is associated with improved biomechanics and decreased pain and pathology. However, many users do not use proper technique, and appropriate assessment and training are needed to address these deficits. The transfer assessment instrument (TAI) 4.0 was designed to meet those needs and improve on past versions by removing the need for clinician training, shortening administration time, and simplifying question content. Objectives: Evaluate the psychometric properties of the TAI 4.0. Methods: A convenience sample of full-time wheelchair users was scored on multiple transfers by four raters to assess interrater, intrarater, and test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the TAI 4.0. Each user also was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: For 44 participants, the mean TAI 4.0 and VAS across all transfers were 7.58 ± 1.12 and 7.44 ± 1.78, respectively, and scores were significantly correlated (r = 0.52-0.7). VAS scores were more strongly influenced by the flight/landing and body setup phases of the transfer. There were no significant associations between TAI 4.0 score and demographics. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) ranged from 0.80 to 0.85 for interrater reliability, 0.60 to 0.76 for intrarater reliability, and 0.55 to 0.76 for test-retest reliability. The minimum detectable change (MDC) for the total score ranged from 1.02 to 1.30. Conclusion: The TAI 4.0 provides reliable and valid quantitative assessment of an individual's transfer without the need for comprehensive training, as is the case with the TAI 3.0. The tool can be completed in 3 minutes (average) in a clinical setting with only a ruler and goniometer.
| S-EPMC6037322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The screening of dementia in non-Westerners has so far relied on translations and adaptations of reputed instruments. Other efforts focused on developing culturally appropriate tests or tests in touch with new developments in the field. This study presents the rationale behind the construction of a new dementia screening test: the Dementia Screening Battery-100 (DSB-100).The DSB-100 was administered to 46 demented individuals and 159 healthy matched controls. All demented participants met the DSM-IV criteria for dementia. The healthy controls showed no cognitive impairment and were independent in activities of daily living. The DSB-100 was administered as part of a larger neuropsychological assessment to collect additional indices on the severity of patients' dementia, depression, and frontal dysfunctions. The same information was used for comparisons with DSB-100 scores.Multiple regression analysis suggested that age and education, but not the variable sex, are essential in predicting cognitive performance. Construct validation yielded 4 factors, namely attention-visuospatial factors, memory, language, and executive functions. The results showed that the DSB-100 has a high interrater reliability and an acceptable overall internal homogeneity.These results validate the DSB-100 and suggest its appropriateness for dementia screening in Tunisian elderly and possibly elderly people from other cultures with modifications to some subscales.
| S-EPMC5498961 | biostudies-other
Project description:A composite pain scale for assessing and quantifying pain in rabbits (CANCRS) has been designed merging the Rabbit Grimace Scale (RbtGS) and a scale including clinical parameters (CPS). Construct validity and inter-rater reliability were assessed for CANCRS, for RbtGS and for CPS, in order to test their potential to detect pain in a clinical setting. Rabbits (n = 116) were either hybrids or purebreds and they were independently evaluated by two raters, who could be veterinarians (V) or veterinary medicine students (S). Score intervals determined four pain classes (No pain, Discomfort, Moderate pain and Severe pain) that matched presumptive pain classes associated with some pathological conditions. A chi-square test was used to assess the construct validity of the scales by checking how frequently scale results and presumptive pain classes matched. Sixty-nine patients were evaluated by one V and one S, whereas forty-seven rabbits were assessed by two V, in order to test inter-rater reliability. An intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to test reliability of the scales, whereas Cohen's kappa tested inter-rater agreement for each parameter of the CANCRS. Construct validity results show that CANCRS and RbtGS efficiently reveal pain (P ? 0.05), while CPS does not (p > 0.05). Inter-rater reliability was very good for both CANCRS and CPS (ICC 0.88 V-V, 0.94 between V-S; ICC 0.97 V-V, 0.91 V-S) and good for RbtGS (ICC 0.77 V-V, 0.88 V-S); therefore, CPS reproducibility was better between veterinarians and students than between veterinarians. Inter-rater agreement between veterinarians and veterinary medicine students was moderate to very good for all the parameters included in the CANCRS (Cohen's kappa >0,60). In conclusion, it is possible to state that the CANCRS has construct validity and it is a reliable tool for use in clinical practice, when coping with many rabbits with morphological differences. It is easy and fast to use and enriches the RbtGS with some clinical parameters that should be monitored during any clinical examination, allowing for capture of the multidimensional aspect of pain.
| S-EPMC7192371 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Consumer food environments are increasingly being recognized as influential determinants of food purchasing and subsequent intake and health. We developed a tool to enable efficient, but relatively comprehensive, appraisal of the in-store food environment. The Store Scout mobile app facilitates the evaluation of product (availability and range), placement (visibility, accessibility, proximity to high-traffic areas, and location relative to other products), price (price promotion), and promotion (displays and advertising) across 7 categories of food products, with appraisal given immediately as scores (0-100, where a higher score is more in line with best practice). Primary end users are public health nutritionists and nutritionists employed by store organizations; however, store managers and staff are also potential end users. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to evaluate the reliability (interrater reliability and internal consistency), utility (distribution of scores), and construct validity (score by store type) of measurements using the Store Scout mobile app. METHODS:The Store Scout mobile app was used independently by 2 surveyors to evaluate the store environment in 54 stores: 34 metropolitan stores (9 small and 11 large supermarkets, 10 convenience stores, and 4 petrol stations) in Brisbane, Australia, and 20 remote stores (19 small supermarkets and 1 petrol station) in Indigenous Australian communities in Northern Australia. The agreement between surveyors in the overall and category scores was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Interrater reliability of measurement items was assessed using percentage agreement and the Gwet agreement coefficient (AC). Internal consistency was assessed by comparing the responses of items measuring similar aspects of the store environment. We examined the distribution of score values using boxplots and differences by store type using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS:The median difference in the overall score between surveyors was 4.4 (range 0.0-11.1), with an ICC of 0.954 (95% CI 0.914-0.975). Most measurement items had very good (n=74/196, 37.8%) or good (n=81/196, 41.3%) interrater reliability using the Gwet AC. A minimal inconsistency of measurement was found. Overall scores ranged from 19.2 to 81.6. There was a significant difference in score by store type (P<.001). Large Brisbane supermarkets scored highest (median 77.4, range 53.2-81.6), whereas small Brisbane supermarkets (median 63.9, range 41.0-71.3) and small remote supermarkets (median 63.8, range 56.5-74.9) scored significantly higher than Brisbane petrol stations (median 33.1, range 19.2-37.8) and convenience stores (median 39.0, range 22.4-63.8). CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest good reliability and internal consistency of food environment measurements using the Store Scout mobile app. We identified specific aspects that can be improved to further increase the reliability of this tool. We found a good distribution of score values and evidence that scoring could capture differences by store type in line with previous evidence, which gives an indication of construct validity. The Store Scout mobile app shows promise in its capability to measure and track the health-enabling characteristics of store environments.
| S-EPMC7407248 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Relative to their application with adults there is currently little information about the application of preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQL) instruments among populations of young people. The Child Health Utility 9D (CHU9D) is a paediatric-specific generic preference-based HRQL instrument, recently translated and linguistically validated into Danish (CHU9D-DK). The purpose of this study was to investigate the construct validity of the CHU9D-DK in a sample of Danish high school students. METHODS:All students attending a Danish High School were invited to participate in a web-based survey in January 2018 (N?=?272). The survey included the CHU9D-DK, the young adult version of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory™ 4.0 Generic Core Scales (PedsQL), self-reported health status, presence/absence of disability/chronic diseases, life satisfaction, and socio-economic questions. CHU9D-DK utility scores were generated by employing the two scoring algorithms developed from adults in the UK and adolescents in Australia, respectively. Internal consistency, reliability and construct validity of the CHU9D-DK instrument were investigated. RESULTS:Two hundred and twenty-eight (84%) students consented to participate and completed the survey. The mean?±?(standard deviation) values of the CHU9D-DK utilities were 0.84 (0.11) when the UK adult algorithm was applied and 0.70 (0.22), when the Australian adolescent algorithm was applied. The mean PedsQL score was 82.32 (13.14). The CHU9D-DK showed good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha?=?0.803). Higher levels of health status and life satisfaction were significantly associated with higher CHU9D-DK utility scores regardless of which scoring algorithm was applied (p-values <?0.001). Students living with a disability/chronic disease exhibited significantly lower utility scores relative to their healthy peers (p-values <?0.05). Higher socio-economic status (approximated by financial situation and frequency of family vacations) was also associated with higher utility scores (p-values <?0.005). CONCLUSION:The CHU9D-DK demonstrated good psychometric performance overall and shows potential as a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the HRQL of Danish young people. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03391999, Registered 15 October 2017.
| S-EPMC6929354 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe AGREE instrument has been validated for evaluating Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) pertaining to medical care. This study evaluated the reliability and validity of physical therapists using the AGREE to assess quality of CPGs relevant to physical therapy practice.MethodsA total of 69 physical therapists participated and were classified as generalists, specialist or researchers. Pairs of appraisers within each category evaluated independently, a set of 6 CPG selected at random from a pool of 55 CPGs.ResultsReliability between pairs of appraisers indicated low to high reliability depending on the domain and number of appraisers (0.17-0.81 for single appraiser; 0.30-0.96 when score averaged across a pair of appraisers). The highest reliability was achieved for Rigour of Development, which exceeded ICC> 0.79, if scores from pairs of appraisers were pooled. Adding more than 3 appraisers did not consistently improve reliability. Appraiser type did not determine reliability scores. End-users, including study participants and a separate sample of 102 physical therapy students, found the AGREE useful to guide critical appraisal. The construct validity of the AGREE was supported in that expected differences on Rigour of Development domains were observed between expert panels versus those with no/uncertain expertise (differences of 10-21% p = 0.09-0.001). Factor analysis with varimax rotation, produced a 4-factor solution that was similar, although not in exact agreement with the AGREE Domains. Validity was also supported by the correlation observed (Kendall-tao = 0.69) between Overall Assessment and the Rigour of Development domain.ConclusionThese findings suggest that the AGREE instrument is reliable and valid when used by physiotherapists to assess the quality of CPG pertaining to physical therapy health services.
| S-EPMC555572 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of the Dutch Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA-NL) in patients who sustained acute physical trauma.DesignA longitudinal cohort study.SettingA level 1 trauma center in The Netherlands.SubjectsPatients who required hospital admission after sustaining an acute physical trauma.InterventionPatients completed the SMFA-NL at six weeks, eight weeks and six months post-injury.Main measureThe measures used were The Dutch Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment. Test-retest reliability (between six and eight weeks post-injury) using intraclass correlation coefficients, the smallest detectable change and Bland and Altman plots. Construct validity (six weeks post-injury) and responsiveness (between six weeks and six months post-injury) were evaluated using the hypothesis testing method.ResultsA total of 248 patients (mean age: 46.5, SD: 13.4) participated, 145 patients completed the retest questionnaires (eight weeks) and 160 patients completed the responsiveness questionnaires (six months). The intraclass correlation coefficients indicated good to excellent reliability on all subscales (0.80 to 0.98). The smallest detectable change was 17.4 for the Upper Extremity Dysfunction subscale, 11.0 for the Lower Extremity Dysfunction subscales, 13.9 for the Problems with Daily Activities subscale and 16.5 for the Mental and Emotional Problems subscale. At group level, the smallest detectable change ranged from 1.48 to 1.96. A total of 86% of the construct validity hypotheses and 79% of the responsiveness hypotheses were confirmed.ConclusionThis study showed that the SMFA-NL has good to excellent reliability, sufficient construct validity and is able to detect change in physical function over time.
| S-EPMC6482597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aim: 'Reasoning 4 Change' (R4C) is a newly developed instrument, including four domains (D1-D4), to assess clinical practitioners' and students' clinical reasoning with a focus on clients' behaviour change in a physiotherapy context. To establish its use in education and research, its psychometric properties needed to be evaluated. The aim of the study was to generate criterion scores and evaluate the reliability and construct validity of a web-based version of the R4C instrument. Methods: Fourteen physiotherapy experts and 39 final-year physiotherapy students completed the R4C instrument and the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT). Twelve experts and 17 students completed the R4C instrument on a second occasion. The R4C instrument was evaluated with regard to: internal consistency (five subscales of D1); test-retest reliability (D1-D4); inter-rater reliability (D2-D4); and construct validity in terms of convergent validity (D1.4, D2, D4). Criterion scores were generated based on the experts' responses to identify the scores of qualified practitioners' clinical reasoning abilities. Results: For the expert and student samples, the analyses demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency (? range: 0.67-0.91), satisfactory test-retest reliability (ICC range: 0.46-0.94) except for D3 for the experts and D4 for the students. The inter-rater reliability demonstrated excellent agreement within the expert group (ICC range: 0.94-1.0). The correlations between the R4C instrument and PABS-PT (r range: 0.06-0.76) supported acceptable construct validity. Conclusions: The web-based R4C instrument shows satisfactory psychometric properties and could be useful in education and research. The use of the instrument may contribute to a deeper understanding of physiotherapists' and students' clinical reasoning, valuable for curriculum development and improvements of competencies in clinical reasoning related to clients' behavioural change.
| S-EPMC6141557 | biostudies-literature