The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, USA; Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, USA.
The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, USA.
Patient Educ Couns. 2022 Jul;105(7):2581-2589. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.01.002. Epub 2022 Jan 22.
To assess the psychometric properties of the consideRATE questions, a measure of serious illness experience.
We recruited people at least 50 years old via paid panels online, with US-Census-based quotas. We randomized participants to a patient experience story at two time points. Participants completed a series of measures, including the consideRATE questions. We assessed convergent (Pearson's correlation), discriminative (one-way ANOVA with Tukey's test for multiple comparisons) and divergent (Pearson's correlation) validity. We also assessed intra-rater reliability (intra-class correlation) and responsiveness to change (t-tests).
We included 809 individuals in our analysis. We established convergent validity (r = 0.77; p < 0.001); discriminative validity (bad/neutral stories [mean diff=0.4; p < 0.001]; neutral/ good stories [mean diff=1.3; p < 0.001]) and moderate divergent validity (r = 0.57; p < 0.001). We established sensitivity to change in all stories (bad/good [mean diff=1.52; p < 0.001]; good/bad [mean diff= -1.68; p < 0.001]; neutral/bad [mean diff= -0.57; p < 0.001]; good/neutral [mean diff= -1.11; p < 0.001]; neutral/good [mean diff= 1.1; p < 0.001]) but one (bad/neutral [mean diff= 0.4; p < 0.07]). Intra-rater reliability was demonstrated between time points (r = 0.77; p < 0.001).
the consideRATE questions were reliable and valid in a simulated online test.
the consideRATE questions may be a practical way to measure serious illness experience and the effectiveness of interventions to improve it.
评估 consideRATE 问题作为一种严重疾病体验测量工具的心理计量学特性。
我们通过付费在线小组招募了至少 50 岁的人群，并进行了基于美国人口普查的配额限制。我们将参与者随机分配到两个时间点的患者体验故事。参与者完成了一系列措施，包括 consideRATE 问题。我们评估了收敛性（Pearson 相关）、判别性（单向方差分析，Tukey 检验进行多重比较）和发散性（Pearson 相关）有效性。我们还评估了内部评估者的可靠性（组内相关系数）和对变化的响应性（t 检验）。
我们的分析纳入了 809 人。我们建立了收敛有效性（r=0.77;p<0.001）；判别有效性（差/中性故事[平均差=0.4;p<0.001]；中性/良好故事[平均差=1.3;p<0.001]）和中等发散有效性（r=0.57;p<0.001）。我们在所有故事中都建立了对变化的敏感性（差/良好[平均差=1.52;p<0.001]；良好/差[平均差=-1.68;p<0.001]；中性/差[平均差=-0.57;p<0.001]；良好/中性[平均差=-1.11;p<0.001]；中性/良好[平均差=1.1;p<0.001]），但有一个故事除外（差/中性[平均差=0.4;p<0.07]）。在时间点之间证明了内部评估者的可靠性（r=0.77;p<0.001）。
consideRATE 问题在模拟在线测试中是可靠和有效的。
consideRATE 问题可能是衡量严重疾病体验和改善其效果的干预措施的有效方法。
