Dataset Information

Measuring stress in podiatric students in Spain: psychometric validation and adaptation of the KEZKAK questionnaire

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The study aim was to develop a linguistic-cultural adaptation of the KEZKAK questionnaire to be completed during the practicum of podiatric medical students in Spain, to validate the questionnaire and to evaluate its psychometric properties.

Methods

The cross-sectional study was carried out in two stages: 1. Cross-cultural adaptation; 2. Clinimetric validation based on assessments of interobserver reliability, test-retest reliability and internal consistency. The participants were podiatric medical students at the universities of Malaga and Miguel Hernandez, Alicante (Spain) and were recruited during the period February–October 2019. The following inclusion criteria were applied: aged at least 18 years, studying the third or fourth year of a university degree in Podiatry. All gave signed informed consent and completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Podiatry version of the KEZKAK questionnaire. No sampling was performed and thus the entire eligible population was included in the study.

Results

The analysis was based on 205 participants (33.5% male, 66.5% female), with a mean age of 23.05 (SD 5.37) years. Internal consistency was excellent, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.95. This version of the questionnaire had five factorial structures (61.18%). No floor/ceiling effect was observed in any item. The KEZKAK presented high test-retest reliability after 21 days, with an overall ICC of 0.95 (95% CI [0.93–0.98]).

Conclusion

For university students of podiatry in Spain, the KEZKAK Podiatry version questionnaire is a valid, reliable instrument for measuring stressors during the practicum.

SUBMITTER: Ortega-Avila A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7733331 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of health literacy to make informed preventive decisions. A specific COVID-19 health literacy questionnaire (CHL-Q) is included in the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring WHO initiative to conduct behavioral insights studies related to COVID-19. The objective was to assess the psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the COVID-19 Health Literacy Questionnaire (CHL-Q).MethodsData quality, acceptability, internal consistency, and construct and structural validity were analyzed. A Rasch analysis was also performed. This cross-sectional, observational study was conducted on the Spanish general population after the first wave of the pandemic and after the end of the general lockdown by an online survey agency. 1033 participants (inclusion criteria were being 18 years or older and living in Spain), was extracted from a panel of approximately 982,000 participants. The sampling was stratified matching the Spanish general population in terms of age, gender, and area of residence. The CHL-Q includes 9 items and assesses people's knowledge, motivation and competencies to access, understand, evaluate, and apply information about COVID-19 in order to make informed decisions.ResultsCHL-Q index presented a mean of 33.89 (SD = 9.4), and good fit to the Rasch model (χ2(32) = 34.672, p = 0.342, person separation index = 0.77), with ordered thresholds, unidimensionality, item local independence, and no item bias by sex, age or education level. The CHL-Q showed significant different scores by level of education, experience of infection, confusion related to COVID-19 information and adherence to preventive measures. We found a statistically significant correlation between the CHL-Q index and the total number of preventive measures adopted, COVID-19 knowledge, and information seeking behaviour. The Cronbach´s alpha was 0.87 and the item total corrected correlation, 0.49-0.68.ConclusionsThe Spanish version of CHL-Q is a short, adequate, and reliable instrument to measure COVID-19 related health literacy in the Spanish general population. Measuring the CHL in the population can be useful to evaluate whether public authorities, media and the medical and scientific community have been able to reach the population to offer the information in the terms they need it.

Project description:INTRODUCTION: The Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) is a commonly used instrument in the evaluation of fibromyalgia (FM) patients. Over the last 18 years, since the publication of the original FIQ, several deficiencies have become apparent and the cumbersome scoring algorithm has been a barrier to widespread clinical use. The aim of this paper is to describe and validate a revised version of the FIQ: the FIQR. METHODS: The FIQR was developed in response to known deficiencies of the FIQ with the help of a patient focus group. The FIQR has the same 3 domains as the FIQ (that is, function, overall impact and symptoms). It differs from the FIQ in having modified function questions and the inclusion of questions on memory, tenderness, balance and environmental sensitivity. All questions are graded on a 0-10 numeric scale. The FIQR was administered online and the results were compared to the same patient's online responses to the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the original FIQ. RESULTS: The FIQR was completed online by 202 FM patients, 51 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients (31 RA and 20 SLE), 11 patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and 213 healthy controls (HC). The mean total FIQR score was 56.6 +/- 19.9 compared to a total FIQ score of 60.6 +/- 17.8 (P < 0.03). The total scores of the FIQR and FIQ were closely correlated (r = 0.88, P < 0.001). Each of the 3 domains of the FIQR correlated well with the 3 related FIQ domains (r = 0.69 to 0.88, P < 0.01). The FIQR showed good correlation with comparable domains in the SF-36, with a multiple regression analysis showing that the three FIQR domain scores predicted the 8 SF-36 subscale scores. The FIQR had good discriminant ability between FM and the 3 other groups; total FIQR scores were HC (12.1 +/- 11.6), RA/SLE (28.6 +/- 21.2) and MDD (17.3 +/- 11.8). The patient completion time was 1.3 minutes; scoring took about 1 minute. CONCLUSIONS: The FIQR is an updated version of the FIQ that has good psychometric properties, can be completed in less than 2 minutes and is easy to score. It has scoring characteristics comparable to the original FIQ, making it possible to compare past FIQ results with future FIQR results.

Project description:IntroductionMost of the EBP measuring instruments available to date present limitations both in the operationalisation of the construct and also in the rigour of their psychometric development, as revealed in the literature review performed. The aim of this paper is to provide rigorous and adequate reliability and validity evidence of the scores of a new transdisciplinary psychometric tool, the Health Sciences Evidence-Based Practice (HS-EBP), for measuring the construct EBP in Health Sciences professionals.MethodsA pilot study and a subsequent two-stage validation test sample were conducted to progressively refine the instrument until a reduced 60-item version with a five-factor latent structure. Reliability was analysed through both Cronbach's alpha coefficient and intraclass correlations (ICC). Latent structure was contrasted using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) following a model comparison aproach. Evidence of criterion validity of the scores obtained was achieved by considering attitudinal resistance to change, burnout, and quality of professional life as criterion variables; while convergent validity was assessed using the Spanish version of the Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (EBPQ-19).ResultsAdequate evidence of both reliability and ICC was obtained for the five dimensions of the questionnaire. According to the CFA model comparison, the best fit corresponded to the five-factor model (RMSEA = 0.049; CI 90% RMSEA = [0.047; 0.050]; CFI = 0.99). Adequate criterion and convergent validity evidence was also provided. Finally, the HS-EBP showed the capability to find differences between EBP training levels as an important evidence of decision validity.ConclusionsReliability and validity evidence obtained regarding the HS-EBP confirm the adequate operationalisation of the EBP construct as a process put into practice to respond to every clinical situation arising in the daily practice of professionals in health sciences (transprofessional). The tool could be useful for EBP individual assessment and for evaluating the impact of specific interventions to improve EBP.

Project description:Mental health services need reliable and valid instruments to measure mental health recovery outcomes, and the only available one in Spanish is arduous. Adapting an instrument is more efficient than creating a new one as it enables international comparison research. The aim of this study was to conduct a cross-cultural adaptation of the 15-item Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery. Fifty-four participants engaged in a five-stage systematic and standardized process carried out from November 2019 to November 2020. Professional translators (n = 4) from the Translation Service Center for Foreign Languages of the Universidad de Alcalá participated in the direct translation, synthesis and back translation stages, and mental health professionals (n = 33) and service users (n = 17) from the Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga and the Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria in Andalucía (Spain), with an average of 19.2 (SD 12.86) years of experience in mental health, participated in the committee of experts and pilot debriefing stages. Additionally, legibility was assessed. Out of the 15-items of the questionnaire, three (20%) were equal amongst translations, three items (20%) of the back translations matched the original questionnaire and discrepancies identified were adapted accordingly. Seven items (46.7%) were approved online by experts and consensus of alternative translations was reached for the rest. The average time spent completing the questionnaire by service users during the face-to-face pilot was 4.12 min (SD 2.25). Internal consistency obtained was ω = 0.95 and α = 0.91. Debriefing findings reported the questionnaire as comprehensible (97.1%), adequate in wording (91.2%), formal in language (55.9%) and adequate in terms of length (100%). The questionnaire scored 65.53, 'normal' readability, on the Inflesz scale. The adapted instrument has conceptual, linguistic, cultural and metric equivalence to the original instrument.