Suppr超能文献

糖尿病生存质量量表(DQOL)中文版条目删减与验证。

Item reduction and validation of the Chinese version of diabetes quality-of-life measure (DQOL).

机构信息

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.

China Center for Health Economic Research, Peking University, Beijing, 100800, China.

出版信息

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018 Apr 27;16(1):78. doi: 10.1186/s12955-018-0905-z.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Diabetes Quality-of-Life (DQOL) Measure is a 46-item diabetes-specific quality of life instrument. The original English version of the DQOL has been translated into Chinese after cultural adaption, and the Chinese DQOL has been validated in the Chinese diabetic patient population and used in diabetes-related studies. There are two recognized problems with the Chinese DQOL: 1) the instrument is too long, and 2) the non-response rate of certain items is relatively high. This study aimed to develop and validate a short version for the Chinese DQOL.

METHODS

Item reduction was conducted based on the classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT), each combined with exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Spearman correlation coefficient were employed in validating the short versions.

RESULTS

Both the study sample (n = 2,886) and the validation sample (n = 2,286) were from a longitudinal observation study of Chinese type 2 diabetic patients. The CTT kept 32 items, and the IRT kept 24 items from the original 46-item version. The two short versions were comparable in psychometric properties.

CONCLUSION

The 24-item IRT-based short version of the Chinese DQOL was selected as the preferred short version because it imposes a lower burden on patients without compromising the psychometric properties of the instrument.

摘要

背景

糖尿病生存质量量表(DQOL)是一种 46 项糖尿病特异性生存质量量表。DQOL 的原始英文版本经过文化调适后已被翻译成中文,中文 DQOL 已在中国糖尿病患者人群中得到验证,并在糖尿病相关研究中使用。中文 DQOL 存在两个公认的问题:1)量表过长,2)某些项目的无反应率相对较高。本研究旨在开发和验证中文 DQOL 的简短版本。

方法

根据经典测量理论(CTT)和项目反应理论(IRT)进行项目删减,两者均结合探索性因素分析(EFA)。采用验证性因子分析(CFA)和斯皮尔曼相关系数验证简短版本。

结果

研究样本(n=2886)和验证样本(n=2286)均来自中国 2 型糖尿病患者的纵向观察研究。CTT 保留了 32 项,IRT 保留了原始 46 项版本中的 24 项。两个简短版本在心理测量特性方面具有可比性。

结论

基于 IRT 的 24 项简短版本被选为首选简短版本,因为它在不影响工具心理测量特性的情况下降低了患者的负担。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

3
Chinese time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states.中国人群 EQ-5D 量表健康状态时间权衡值。
Value Health. 2014 Jul;17(5):597-604. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.05.007. Epub 2014 Jul 23.
8
Likert scales, levels of measurement and the "laws" of statistics.李克特量表、测量水平与“统计学定律”。
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2010 Dec;15(5):625-32. doi: 10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y. Epub 2010 Feb 10.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验