Suppr超能文献

对三种糖尿病评估工具所得推论有效性的评估:一项拉施分析

An evaluation of the validity of inferences made from 3 diabetes assessment instruments: a Rasch analysis.

作者信息

Handley Lisa Izzo, Warholak Jackson Terri L, Jackson Terrence R

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy Practice, Midwestern University, Chicago College of Pharmacy, Downers Grove, IL, USA.

出版信息

Res Social Adm Pharm. 2008 Mar;4(1):67-81. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2007.04.002.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many patients who have diabetes lack adequate knowledge, positive attitudes, and sufficient resources to achieve optimal outcomes in the management of their disease. A key to assessing the impact of pharmacists' interactions with diabetes patients is the resultant impact on patient knowledge, attitudes, and satisfaction. As such, it is important that quality instruments be used to obtain accurate and dependable measures of these outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the validity of inferences made from 3 separate diabetes instruments used in the assessment of patient knowledge, attitudes, and satisfaction.

METHODS

This pilot study enrolled 30 patients with diabetes mellitus to evaluate the following 3 instruments: (1) Check Your Hemoglobin A1CIQ, (2) the revised Diabetes Questionnaire, and (3) a satisfaction questionnaire. The instruments were used to assess patient knowledge of diabetes and diabetes-related complications, attitudes toward having diabetes mellitus, and satisfaction with the services provided in a pharmacist-run diabetes clinic, respectively. Rasch analysis was used to determine if the instruments were able to measure the concepts they are intended to measure when used in this sample.

RESULTS

After evaluating the 3 instruments, it was determined that Instrument 1 displayed construct underrepresentation and some mistargeting. Moreover, Instrument 2 demonstrated reasonably good rating scale function but exhibited construct underrepresentation and ceiling effects. Finally, Instrument 3 did not meet the necessary requirements for proper rating scale function and displayed ceiling effects and mistargeting.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot evaluation suggested that none of the instruments were useful in this population, which reinforces the need for researchers to use item response theories to examine the psychometric properties of instruments used in reporting various patient outcome measures. Pharmacists and other health care professionals should be alerted to potential problems with the validity of inferences made from underperforming instruments, so as to prevent inaccurate conclusions.

摘要

背景

许多糖尿病患者缺乏足够的知识、积极的态度和充足的资源来实现疾病管理的最佳效果。评估药剂师与糖尿病患者互动影响的一个关键因素是对患者知识、态度和满意度的最终影响。因此,使用高质量的工具来准确可靠地衡量这些结果非常重要。

目的

评估用于评估患者知识、态度和满意度的3种不同糖尿病工具所得推论的有效性。

方法

这项试点研究招募了30名糖尿病患者,以评估以下3种工具:(1)“检查你的糖化血红蛋白IQ”,(2)修订后的糖尿病问卷,以及(3)一份满意度问卷。这些工具分别用于评估患者对糖尿病及糖尿病相关并发症的知识、对患糖尿病的态度,以及对药剂师管理的糖尿病诊所提供服务的满意度。采用拉施分析来确定这些工具在该样本中使用时是否能够测量它们 intended to measure 的概念。

结果

在评估这3种工具后,确定工具1表现出结构代表性不足和一些目标定位错误。此外,工具2显示出相当好的评分量表功能,但存在结构代表性不足和天花板效应。最后,工具3不符合适当评分量表功能的必要要求,显示出天花板效应和目标定位错误。

结论

这项试点评估表明,这些工具在该人群中均无用,这强化了研究人员使用项目反应理论来检验用于报告各种患者结局指标的工具的心理测量特性的必要性。药剂师和其他医疗保健专业人员应警惕由表现不佳的工具所得推论有效性方面的潜在问题,以防止得出不准确的结论。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验