Dataset Information

Translation and validation of the Chinese version of medical maximizer-minimizer scale: a cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Medical overutilisation and underutilisation affect optimal healthcare. The Medical Maximizer-Minimizer Scale (MMS) was developed to assess individual medical maximising and minimising tendencies. Despite significant improvement in the healthcare system over the past four decades, no psychometric scales to examine treatment maximising and minimising preferences are available in China. This study aimed to translate the MMS into Chinese and examine its reliability and validity in a Chinese population.

Design

This cross-sectional study was conducted in December 2019 through an online survey panel.

Methods

The MMS was translated into a Chinese version (CN-MMS) using a forward-backward translation procedure. Next, a random online survey of the general population in China was conducted. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis were performed to examine the underlying factor structure of the CN-MMS. The internal consistency reliability of the scale was determined using Cronbach's ? coefficient and corrected item-total correlation. A multivariate linear regression analysis was used to examine associations between medical maximising and minimising preferences and demographic variables in the Chinese population.

Results

This study included 984 participants aged 18-80 years. The CN-MMS retained 10 items, and the EFA supported a two-factor structure. The model fit for this two-factor structure of the CN-MMS was acceptable with ?²/df=3.7, comparative fit index=0.958, goodness-of-fit index=0.951, Tucker-Lewis Index=0.944 and root mean square error of approximation=0.074. The scale had a Cronbach's ? coefficient of 0.864, corrected item-total correlation of 0.451-0.667, and test-retest reliability of 0.815. Significant predictors of CN-MMS total score were nationality and household monthly income.

Conclusions

The CN-MMS showed satisfactory psychometric properties. Therefore, it can be used to investigate the individual medical maximising and minimising tendencies among the general Chinese population.

SUBMITTER: Lai F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7789444 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Translation and validation of the Chinese version of medical maximizer-minimizer scale: a cross-sectional study.

Lai Fenghua F Pei Ling L Yue Shufan S Cao Xiaopei X Xiao Haipeng H Li Yanbing Y Li Jin J

BMJ open 20210106 1

<h4>Objective</h4>Medical overutilisation and underutilisation affect optimal healthcare. The Medical Maximizer-Minimizer Scale (MMS) was developed to assess individual medical maximising and minimising tendencies. Despite significant improvement in the healthcare system over the past four decades, no psychometric scales to examine treatment maximising and minimising preferences are available in China. This study aimed to translate the MMS into Chinese and examine its reliability and validity in ...[more]

PMID: 33408206

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccines have been administered in many countries; however, a sufficient vaccine coverage rate is not guaranteed due to vaccine hesitancy. To improve the uptake rate of COVID-19 vaccine, it is essential to evaluate the rate of vaccine hesitancy and explore relevant factors in different populations. An urgent need is to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among different population groups, hence a validated scale for measuring COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is necessary. The present study aims to validate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale among different populations in China and to provide a scale measuring COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy with satisfactory reliability and validity.MethodsSelf-reported survey data were collected from different populations in China from January to March 2021. Based on the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines scale, 15 items were adapted to evaluate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were utilized to identify internal constructs of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale among two randomly split subsets of the overall sample. Reliability was analyzed with the internal consistency, composite reliability, and the test-retest reliability, and validity was analyzed with the criterion validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.ResultsA total of 4227 participants completed the survey, with 62.8% being medical workers, 17.8% being students, 10.3% being general population, and 9.1% being public health professionals. The exploratory factor analysis revealed a three-factor structure that explain 50.371% of the total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis showed that models consisting of three dimensions constructed in different populations had good or acceptable fit (CFI ranged from 0.902 to 0.929, RMSEA ranged from 0.061 to 0.069, and TLI ranged from 0.874 to 0.912). The Cronbach's α for the total scale and the three subscales was 0.756, 0.813, 0.774 and 0.705, respectively. Moreover, the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale had adequate test-retest reliability, criterion validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale is a valid and reliable scale for identifying COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among different population groups in China. Given the serious consequences of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, future studies should validate it across regions and time to better understand the application of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale.

Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, oral care for older people has received extensive attention in long-term care facilities. The Self-Efficacy for Providing Mouth Care (SE-PMC) and Attitudes for Providing Mouth Care (A-PMC) scale evaluated the self-efficacy and attitude of nursing staff while providing oral care. However, whether this scale is valid and reliable for Chinese nursing staff in China remains unverified. This study aims to translate the English version of SE-PMC and A-PMC into Chinese and determine their reliability and validity.MethodsAfter obtaining the author's consent, the procedure for a double-back translation and cross-cultural adaptation was conducted to develop the Chinese version of SE-PMC and A-PMC. The validity and reliability of the Chinese version of SE-PMC and A-PMC were evaluated in a cross-sectional observational study with 852 nurses from 42 Geriatric Care Facilities (GCFs). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (n = 427) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (n = 425) were conducted to test the construct validity and quality of the factor structures. We applied the item discrimination test and homogeneity test for item analysis. Cronbach's alpha coefficient and split-half coefficient were adopted to evaluate internal consistency.ResultsThe Chinese version of SE-PMC (11 items, 3 factors) and A-PMC (11 items, 2 factors) included 22 items, reflecting adequate construct validity and reliability. In addition, test-retest reliability was 0.809 for SE-PMC and 0.811 for A-PMC, evincing good stability. The Cronbach's α coefficient of SE-PMC was 0.831, with each factor ranging from 0.793~0.906. The Cronbach's α coefficient of the A-PMC was 0.768, with each factor ranging from 0.814~0.824. Item-Content Validity Index (I-CVI) of SE-PMC and A-PMC ranged from 0.84 ~1.00 and 0.82~1.00, respectively.ConclusionThe Chinese version of SE-PMC and A-PMC was validated as a reliable assessment tool to evaluate the self-efficacy and attitude of nursing staff in GCFs for providing oral care in China.

Project description:BackgroundTo our knowledge, there is currently no psychometrically validated Hungarian scale to evaluate nurses' knowledge about infection prevention and control (IPC) practices. Thus, we aim in this study to assess the validity and reliability of the infection control standardized questionnaire Hungarian version (ICSQ-H).MethodsA cross-sectional, multisite study was conducted among 591 nurses in Hungary. The original ICSQ included 25 questions. First, the questionnaire was translated into Hungarian. Then, content validity was assessed by a committee of four specialists. This was done by calculating the item content validity index and scale content validity index. Afterward, structural validity was evaluated in a two-step process using principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. The goodness of fit for the model was measured through fit indices. Convergent validity was assessed by calculating the average variance extracted. Additionally, discriminant validity was evaluated by computing the Spearman correlation coefficient between the factors. Finally, the interitem correlations, the corrected item-total correlations, and the internal consistency were calculated.ResultsThe content validity of the questionnaire was established with 23 items. The final four-factor ICSQ-H including 10 items showed a good fit model. Convergent validity was met except for the alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) factor, while discriminant validity was met for all factors. The interitem correlations and the corrected item-total correlations were met for all factors, but the internal consistency of ABHR was unsatisfactory due to the low number of items.ConclusionsThe results did not support the original three-factor structure of the ICSQ. However, the four-factor ICSQ-H demonstrated an adequate degree of good fit and was found to be reliable. Based on our findings, we believe that the ICSQ-H could pave the way for more research regarding nurses' IPC knowledge to be conducted in Hungary. Nevertheless, its validation among other healthcare workers is important to tailor effective interventions to enhance knowledge and awareness.

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.

Dataset Information

Translation and validation of the Chinese version of medical maximizer-minimizer scale: a cross-sectional study.

Objective

Design

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Translation and validation of the Chinese version of medical maximizer-minimizer scale: a cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets