Suppr超能文献

工作限制问卷的结构效度评价:使用 Rasch 模型。

An Evaluation of the Structural Validity of the Work Limitation Questionnaire Using the Rasch Model.

机构信息

School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St. Joseph's Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada.

School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St. Joseph's Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada; School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Apr;102(4):633-644. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.11.009. Epub 2020 Dec 10.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the targeting, scaling, and structural validity of the Work Limitation Questionnaire (WLQ) using Rasch analysis.

DESIGN

Secondary data analysis.

SETTING

Tertiary care hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

The data were sourced from an upper limb specialty clinic of injured workers using the convenience sampling method and from a national randomized controlled trial investigating 2 surgical options for rotator cuff repair by formal, randomized selection (N=315).

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Work Limitation Questionnaire 25-item version (WLQ-25). The WLQ contains 25 items measuring a client's ability to perform specific job demands on a 5-point ordinal response scale ranging from 0 (difficulty none of the time) to 4 (difficulty all the time). The average of all 25 items is used as the total score, ranging from 0 to 4, where higher index scores indicate greater difficulty performing daily work. Subscales were used to assess time management, physical demands (PD), mental-interpersonal demands, and output demands.

RESULTS

The Rasch analyses performed on the dataset included the test of fit of residuals, ordering of item thresholds, Person separation index, differential item functioning (DIF), dependency, and unidimensionality. The partial credit model was selected for the current Rasch analysis because the likelihood ratio test was significant at both the overall questionnaire and the subscale level (P<.001). The WLQ-25 did not fit with the Rasch model (χ=1715.58; df=125; P<.001) and most of the thresholds were disordered. A series of steps were undertaken to improve the fit statistic, including item reduction (6 items) and response merging (9 items). DIF was absent in the revised scale based on sex, age, full- or part-time employment, and type of employment. Only 3 revised subscales, namely the PD, mental demands, and interpersonal demands subscales, demonstrated acceptable fit to the Rasch model.

CONCLUSIONS

The WLQ-25 demonstrated substantial misfit from the Rasch model, which could not be fully mediated. The revised PD, mental demands, and interpersonal demands subscales could be used to assess these constructs.

摘要

目的

使用 Rasch 分析研究工作限制问卷(WLQ)的靶向性、标度和结构有效性。

设计

二次数据分析。

设置

三级护理医院。

参与者

数据来自上肢专科诊所的受伤工人,采用方便抽样法,并来自全国随机对照试验,该试验通过正式随机选择调查两种肩袖修复手术选择(N=315)。

干预措施

不适用。

主要观察指标

工作限制问卷 25 项版本(WLQ-25)。WLQ 包含 25 个项目,用于衡量患者在 5 点序数反应量表上执行特定工作要求的能力,范围从 0(从未有过困难)到 4(一直有困难)。所有 25 个项目的平均值用作总分,范围从 0 到 4,其中指数得分越高表示日常工作难度越大。子量表用于评估时间管理、身体需求(PD)、心理-人际需求和输出需求。

结果

对数据集进行的 Rasch 分析包括残差拟合检验、项目阈值排序、个体分离指数、差异项目功能(DIF)、依赖性和单维性。由于在整体问卷和子量表水平上似然比检验均具有统计学意义(P<.001),因此选择了部分信用模型进行当前的 Rasch 分析。WLQ-25 不符合 Rasch 模型(χ=1715.58;df=125;P<.001),且大多数阈值无序。为了改善拟合统计数据,进行了一系列步骤,包括项目减少(6 项)和响应合并(9 项)。根据性别、年龄、全职或兼职就业以及就业类型,修订后的量表中不存在差异项目功能。只有 3 个修订后的子量表,即 PD、心理需求和人际需求子量表,符合 Rasch 模型的要求。

结论

WLQ-25 与 Rasch 模型存在显著不匹配,无法完全调解。修订后的 PD、心理需求和人际需求子量表可用于评估这些结构。

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