Dataset Information

Construct validity and internal consistency of the Breast Inflammatory Symptom Severity Index in lactating mothers with inflammatory breast conditions

ABSTRACT:

Background

Inflammatory Conditions of the Lactating Breast (ICLB) affect more than one in five lactating mothers, yet no fully validated outcome measures exist to aid clinicians in their patient-centred care of women with ICLB. The Breast Inflammatory Symptom Severity Index (BISSI) is an ICLB-specific clinician administered patient-reported outcome measure, currently used by Australian clinicians, who treat mothers with ICLB. To date the BISSI has undergone partial psychometric development. This study, therefore, aimed to undertake the next stage of psychometric development by determining the construct validity and internal consistency of the BISSI.

Methods

A retrospective audit was conducted on patient records of 160 mothers who were treated for ICLB, at a private physiotherapy practice in Melbourne, Australia. An electronic data capture tool was used to collate BISSI scores and associated ICLB assessment variables. Construct validity was determined through factor analysis and discriminant performance. Reliability was determined by assessing measures of internal consistency.

Results

Factor analysis established that BISSI items (n = 10) loaded on to four factors, Wellness, Pain, Physical Characteristics of Affected Area (PCAA), and Inflammation, which together, explained 71.2% of variance. The remaining item (‘Wellness/sickness unspecified’) did not load. Wellness, Pain, PCAA and Inflammation factors individually and collectively displayed the ability to discriminate symptom severity, as scores were significantly higher in mothers with high symptom severity (assessed via AUC close to or >0.7 and P value <0.005 for each factor). The BISSI demonstrated internal consistency with an overall Cronbach alpha of 0.742.

Conclusions

The BISSI has adequate construct validity, demonstrating behaviour consistent with theoretical constructs of inflammation severity, via its dimensionality and ability to discriminate symptom severity. The BISSI also has adequate internal consistency demonstrating reliability. Therefore, clinicians can have confidence that the BISSI is valid, the individual item scores are correlated, and the concepts are consistently measured.

SUBMITTER: Heron E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8603819 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Since more people are reaching older and older ages, healthcare systems are becoming in need of more and more knowledgeable nurses to meet the specific health care needs of older persons. Several instruments exist to measure and evaluate students' knowledge of older persons, ageing, and gerontological care; however, unequivocal evidence on their use and psychometric properties is scarce. The aim of the study was to validate a revised version of Palmore's Facts on Aging Quiz (FAQ). METHODS: A cross-sectional, exploratory study was conducted. Palmore's FAQ version 1 and Facts on Aging Mental Health Quiz were used as bases for the development of a revised FAQ instrument. Three researchers translated these instruments into Dutch. A panel of nine experts in geriatric research and gerontological care evaluated the translation and the face and content validity of the instrument. We used a cross-sectional, exploratory design to assess its internal consistency and construct validity. Cronbach's alpha coefficients, exploratory factor analysis, and the known-groups technique were used for these analyses. RESULTS: Based on the experts' consensus, a revised version of the FAQ, consisting of 36 items, was produced. Exploratory factor analysis did not reveal underlying constructs suggesting that the revised version encloses a more general concept of knowledge (e.g. about older persons, aging, gerontological care). Using the known-groups technique, we validated the instrument, showing that it discriminates between the knowledge of first- and third-year nursing students. The overall Cronbach's coefficient of 0.723 was acceptable and changed minimally (from 0.708 to 0.724) when items were removed. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the revised version of the FAQ can be used to properly evaluate nursing students' knowledge about older persons and gerontological care, as reasonable reliability and validity were established for this revised version of the FAQ.