Dataset Information

Validation of an Asbestos Exposure Questionnaire (QEAS-7) for Clinical Practice.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The seven-item QEAS-7 questionnaire (exposure to asbestos questionnaire) has been designed as a useful and simple tool to establish the probability of exposure to asbestos. The objective of the present study is to validate the QEAS-7 following the recommended methodology.

Methods

The QEAS-7 was prospectively administered to 90 subjects with and without asbestos-related disease (ARD), on two consecutive occasions by two independent researchers. Logical and content validity was evaluated by a committee of experts and construct validity through hypothesis testing. Intra- and interobserver reliability was assessed by calculating Cohen's Kappa index (?), which was estimated as weak if below 0.40, moderate if between 0.41 and 0.60 and good/very good if above 0.60. The comparison between proportions was examined using Pearson's Chi-square test.

Results

The majority of participants (88.9%) were male. Mean age was 70.8 years (SD = 8.4) and most of the sample had completed primary education but had not progressed further (62.2%). Forty-three had ARD. The logical, content and construct validity of the QEAS-7 was considered adequate both by a committee of experts and by the users interviewed. The mean administration time was 9 min and 25 s (SD = 3 min and 49 s). The verification of the five hypotheses confirmed the construct validity and the intra- and interobserver reliability to be ? = 0.93 and ? = 0.50 respectively. The concordance in the estimation of asbestos exposure was ? = 0.65.

Conclusions

The QEAS-7 is a simple, valid and reliable tool for estimating the probability of exposure to asbestos. Its application in clinical practice appears justified. What is already known about this subject? No studies have been published to date on the validation of specific questionnaires designed to determine asbestos exposure for routine use by healthcare staff in the clinical setting. What are the new findings? This questionnaire can be considered a comprehensible, viable, valid and reliable instrument for identifying exposure to asbestos. Its brevity and simplicity of administration make it ideally suited for use in daily clinical practice. How might this impact on policy or clinical practice in the foreseeable future? This questionnaire can be of help for physicians attending to patients with suspected asbestos-related diseases both in the hospital and in the primary care setting.

SUBMITTER: Ferrer J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7764759 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of an Asbestos Exposure Questionnaire (QEAS-7) for Clinical Practice.

Ferrer Jaume J Granados Galo G Hernández Santos S Cruz María-Jesús MJ Sampol Júlia J Álvarez Simón Daniel D Ramada José-María JM

International journal of environmental research and public health 20201208 24

<h4>Introduction</h4>The seven-item QEAS-7 questionnaire (exposure to asbestos questionnaire) has been designed as a useful and simple tool to establish the probability of exposure to asbestos. The objective of the present study is to validate the QEAS-7 following the recommended methodology.<h4>Methods</h4>The QEAS-7 was prospectively administered to 90 subjects with and without asbestos-related disease (ARD), on two consecutive occasions by two independent researchers. Logical and content vali ...[more]

PMID: 33302485

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite the available information on cancer risk, asbestos is used in large areas in the world, mostly in the production of asbestos cement. Moreover, questions are raised regarding the shape of the dose response relation, the relation with time since exposure and the association with neoplasms in various organs. We conducted a study on the relationship between cumulative asbestos exposure and mortality from asbestos related diseases in a large Italian pool of 21 cohorts of asbestos-cement workers with protracted exposure to both chrysotile and amphibole asbestos.MethodsThe cohort included 13,076 workers, 81.9% men and 18.1% women, working in 21 Italian asbestos-cement factories, with over 40?years of observation. Exposure was estimated by plant and period, and weighted for the type of asbestos used. Data were analysed with consideration of cause of death, cumulative exposure and time since first exposure (TSFE), and by gender. SMRs were computed using reference rates by region, gender and calendar time. Poisson regression models including cubic splines were used to analyse the effect of cumulative exposure to asbestos and TSFE on mortality for asbestos-related diseases. 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were computed according to the Poisson distribution.ResultsMortality was significantly increased for 'All Causes' and 'All Malignant Neoplasm (MN)', in both genders. Considering asbestos related diseases (ARDs), statistically significant excesses were observed for MN of peritoneum (SMR: men 14.19; women 15.14), pleura (SMR: 22.35 and 48.10), lung (SMR: 1.67 and 1.67), ovary (in the highest exposure class SMR 2.45), and asbestosis (SMR: 507 and 1023). Mortality for ARDs, in particular pleural and peritoneal malignancies, lung cancer, ovarian cancer and asbestosis increased monotonically with cumulative exposure. Pleural MN mortality increased progressively in the first 40?years of TSFE, then reached a plateau, while peritoneal MN showed a continuous increase. The trend of lung cancer SMRs also showed a flattening after 40?years of TSFE. Attributable proportions for pleural, peritoneal, and lung MN were respectively 96, 93 and 40%.ConclusionsMortality for ARDs was associated with cumulative exposure to asbestos. Risk of death from pleural MN did not increase indefinitely with TSFE but eventually reached a plateau, consistently with reports from other recent studies.

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:BACKGROUND:Evidence-based practice (EBP) education or training are considered fundamental to building and strengthening an EBP culture, as well as to encouraging evidence-based academic and clinical practice in the nursing community. However, few valid and reliable instruments are available for the assessment of EBP teaching and learning in clinical nurses in China. Translation, reliability, and validity testing of the English Evidence-Based Practice Profile Questionnaire (EBP2Q), which has strong psychometric properties, may encourage evaluation and promote the implementation of EBP in Mainland China. METHODS:Based on established guidelines for the development of questionnaires, the English EBP2Q was translated and cross-culturally adapted. The Chinese version of the EBP2Q (EBP2Q-C) was validated using a sample of 543 nurses. Structural validity was evaluated through exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis, and the questionnaire was tested for convergent and criterion validity. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability were also evaluated. RESULTS:The content validity index demonstrated good content validity (?0.98). An eight-factor structure was obtained in the exploratory factor analysis, and verified by a three-order factor model from the confirmatory factor analysis (?2/df?=?2.001; RMSEA?=?0.065; SRMR?=?0.077; and CFI?=?0.884). The Spearman's rank correlation analysis of the EBP2Q-C with the Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire showed moderate correlations for Practice (0.58) and Confidence (0.68) and a low correlation for Sympathy (0.32). Criterion validity was demonstrated by significant differences in terms of nurses' highest education, present position, EBP training, involvement in research programs, and level of understanding of English. Both the overall Cronbach's ? and the Cronbach's ? for the domains exceeded 0.70. The intraclass correlation coefficients for the domains ranged between 0.75 and 0.96, indicating satisfactory repeatability. CONCLUSIONS:Except for the convergent validity of the Sympathy domain, the EBP2Q-C provided evidence of validity and reliability. Therefore, it can be applied in EBP education or training assessment in Mainland China.

Project description:IntroductionContemporary validity testing theory holds that validity lies in the extent to which a proposed interpretation and use of test scores is justified, the evidence for which is dependent on both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Despite this, we hypothesise that development and validation studies for assessments in the field of health primarily report a limited range of statistical properties, and that a systematic theoretical framework for validity testing is rarely applied. Using health literacy assessments as an exemplar, this paper outlines a protocol for a systematic descriptive literature review about types of validity evidence being reported and if the evidence is reported within a theoretical framework.Methods and analysisA systematic descriptive literature review of qualitative and quantitative research will be used to investigate the scope of validation practice in the rapidly growing field of health literacy assessment. This review method employs a frequency analysis to reveal potentially interpretable patterns of phenomena in a research area; in this study, patterns in types of validity evidence reported, as assessed against the criteria of the 2014 Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, and in the number of studies using a theoretical validity testing framework. The search process will be consistent with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. Outcomes of the review will describe patterns in reported validity evidence, methods used to generate the evidence and theoretical frameworks underpinning validation practice and claims. This review will inform a theoretical basis for future development and validity testing of health assessments in general.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this systematic review because only published research will be examined. Dissemination of the review findings will be through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, at conference presentations and in the lead author's doctoral thesis.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Validity refers to the extent to which evidence and theory support the adequacy and appropriateness of inferences based on score interpretations. The health sector is lacking a theoretically-driven framework for the development, testing and use of health assessments. This study used the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing framework of five sources of validity evidence to assess the types of evidence reported for health literacy assessments, and to identify studies that referred to a theoretical validity testing framework. METHODS:A systematic descriptive literature review investigated methods and results in health literacy assessment development, application and validity testing studies. Electronic searches were conducted in EBSCOhost, Embase, Open Access Theses and Dissertations and ProQuest Dissertations. Data were coded to the Standards' five sources of validity evidence, and for reference to a validity testing framework. RESULTS:Coding on 46 studies resulted in 195 instances of validity evidence across the five sources. Only nine studies directly or indirectly referenced a validity testing framework. Evidence based on relations to other variables is most frequently reported. CONCLUSIONS:The health and health equity of individuals and populations are increasingly dependent on decisions based on data collected through health assessments. An evidence-based theoretical framework provides structure and coherence to existing evidence and stipulates where further evidence is required to evaluate the extent to which data are valid for an intended purpose. This review demonstrates the use of the Standards' theoretical validity testing framework to evaluate sources of evidence reported for health literacy assessments. Findings indicate that theoretical validity testing frameworks are rarely used to collate and evaluate evidence in validation practice for health literacy assessments. Use of the Standards' theoretical validity testing framework would improve evaluation of the evidence for inferences derived from health assessment data on which public health and health equity decisions are based.

Dataset Information

Validation of an Asbestos Exposure Questionnaire (QEAS-7) for Clinical Practice.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Validation of an Asbestos Exposure Questionnaire (QEAS-7) for Clinical Practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure