ObjectiveTo translate the King’s Brief Interstitial Lung Disease (K-BILD) to Chinese, so as to provide an well reliability and validity assessment instrument for health status of patients with interstitial lung disease.MethodsBrislin’s transition model, six expert’s panel and pre-survey were used for initial Chinese version of K-BILD. Items analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability were used for validity and reliability test with 122 respondents.ResultsTen-item Chinese version of K-BILD were proved to have great psychometric qualities, two factors were extracted by EFA, which could explain 63.35% of the total variance. Furthermore, the CFA demonstrates the fit indices of two-factors mode: χ2/df=0.797, RMSEA=0.000, NFI=0.848, IFI=1.048, CFI=1.000, TLI=1.071. Cronbach’s α and Guttman Split-half were 0.893 and 0.861, respectively. Besides, the test-retest reliability of the scale was 0.805.ConclusionThe Chinese version of K-BILD scale has good validity and reliability, which is applicable for health status assessment in patient with interstitial lung disease.
ObjectiveTo compare and evaluate the discrimination, validity, and reliability of different data envelopment analysis (DEA) models for measuring the effectiveness of models by selecting different input and output indicators of the model.MethodsData from health statistical reports and pilot program of diagnosis-related groups of tertiary hospitals in Hubei Province from 2017 to 2018 were used to analyze the discrimination, content and structure validity, and reliability of the models. Six DEA models were established by enriching the details of input and output on the basis of the input and output indicators of the conventional DEA model of hospitals.ResultsFrom the view of discrimination, the results of all models were left-skewed, the cost-efficiency model had the lowest left-skewed degree (skewness coefficient: -0.14) and was the flattest (kurtosis coefficient: -1.02). From the view of structure validity, the results of the cost-efficiency model were positively correlated with total weights, outpatient visits, and inpatient visits (r=0.328, 0.329, 0.315; P<0.05). From the perspective of content validity, the interpretation of model was more consistent with theory of production after revision of input and output indicators. From the view of reliability, the cost efficiency model had the largest correlation coefficient between the data of 2017 and 2018 (r=0.880, P<0.05).ConclusionsAfter refining the input and output indicators of the DEA model, the discrimination, validity, and reliability of the model are higher, and the results are more reasonable. Using indicators such as discrimination, validity, and reliability can measure the effectiveness of the DEA model, and then optimize the model by selecting different input and output indicators.
Objective To develop a behavioral assessment scale for medication management plans in women of childbearing age with epilepsy and to test its reliability and validity. Methods Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior, a pool of questionnaire items was initially drafted through literature review and focus group discussions. A two-round Delphi expert consultation was conducted with 15 experts to form a test version of the behavioral assessment scale for medication management plans in women of childbearing age with epilepsy (including 27 items and 5 dimensions). Convenience sampling was used to conduct surveys among women of childbearing age with epilepsy in some tertiary hospitals in Chuxiong, Shenzhen and Wuhan from February to May 2024 (the first time) and from June to October 2024 (the second time). ResultsThe effective recovery rates of the two rounds of questionnaires were 95.5% and 94.6%, respectively. The final scale included 24 items and 5 dimensions, with good reliability and validity: the content validity index (S-CVI) was 0.934, Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.876, split-half reliability was 0.819, and test-retest reliability was 0.901; exploratory factor analysis extracted 5 factors (cumulative variance explained rate 73.97%, item load 0.42~0.85), and confirmatory factor analysis showed that the model had good fit (χ2/df=1.849, RMSEA=0.075, CFI, GFI, AGFI, IFI, TLI all>0.85). Conclusion The scale meets the reliability and validity standards and can be used to assess the medication management plans and behaviors of women of childbearing age with epilepsy.
Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a method that can compare and rank the effects of different interventions, which plays an important role in evidence translation and evidence-based decision-making. In 2014, the GRADE working group first introduced the GRADE method for NMA evidence certainty grading. Since then, its method system has been gradually supplemented and improved. In recent years, the GRADE working group has further improved the methods for evaluating intransitivity and imprecision in NMA, and has made recommendations for the presentation and interpretation of NMA results, forming a complete methodological chain of NMA evidence certainty grading and result interpretation consisting of 6 steps. Our team updated the method system of GRADE applied in NMA with specific cases to provide references for relevant researchers.
Objective To develop an evaluation tool for the screening of high risk population for oral complications in critically ill patients, which can be performed accurately and scientifically. Methods Basing on the related foreign oral assessment scale, combined with the method of brainstorming, expert consultation, method of clinical status and so on, the item pool of the assessment scale was determined. Five nursing experts and two oral experts assessed the content validity and 50 ICU nurses were tested. Then, the screening accuracy of the assessment scale was proved by application in 100 critically ill patients selected randomly. Results The Cronbach’s a coefficient of final version of the High Risk Assessment Scale for Oral Complications in Critically Ill Patients (including seven parts contents of oral health assessment and oral pH value test) was 0.815, the content validity index (Sr-CVI/Ave) was 0.932. The results of 50 nurses to the 91.2% assessment items of the assessment scale were very important and important. For screening related indicators of oral complications in high-risk patients, the sensitivity of the assessment scale was 97.53%, the specificity was 94.11%, the positive predictive value was 98.75%, the negative predictive value was 88.89%, and the crude agreement was 95%. Conclusion There are good reliability, validity and a high accuracy of screening test in the High Risk Assessment Scale for Oral Complications in Critically Ill Patients. It can be used for screening patients at high risk for oral complications in critically ill patients, and help clinical nurses to complete the oral health status of the critically ill patients quickly.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the reliability and validity of the Quality of Working Life Scale (QWL7-32). MethodsThe QWL7-32 scale was used to survey 487 drilling workers. The presence of chronic diseases was regarded as an effector for evaluating physical health, and the result of SCL-90 measurement was regarded as an effector for evaluating psychological health. The reliability and validity of the scale were statistically analyzed. ResultsThe results of the Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.713, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.920, and the Splithalf reliability coefficient was 0.942. The result of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the construct validity of scale was good, and the accumulative rate of 7 variances was 62.59%. The results of correlation analysis and t test showed that the validity of scale criterion was also good. In QWL7-32 scale, each dimension showed a good correlation with its relevant item but poor correlation with any other items. ConclusionThe QWL7-32 has a good reliability and validity.
ObjectiveTo assess the reliability, effectiveness, and the safety of full endoscopic transforaminal decompression (FETD) under local anesthesia guided by the classification of lateral region of the lumbar spinal canal (CLLSC) in treating lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in geriatric patients.MethodsThe clinical data of 63 geriatric patients with LSS met the inclusion criteria underwent FETD surgery between June 2015 and July 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 37 males and 26 females, with a median age of 76 years [interquartile range (IQR), 73-80 years], and a median symptomatic duration of 55 months (IQR, 16-120 months). There were 17 cases of grade B and 46 cases of grade C based on the Schizas morphological grading system. CLLSC was used for imaging evaluation for the stenotic condition, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to test intra-observer and inter-observer reliability of CLLSC. The stenotic condition of patients was re-evaluated by the surgeon after operation, and the results were compared with the findings of preoperative CLLSC. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score for low back pain and leg pain recorded before operation, and at 1 day, 3 months, and 6 months after operation, and last follow-up were used to assess the pain relieving; the functional improvement was evaluate by Oswestry disability index (ODI); the modified Macnab criteria were used to self-evaluate the surgical satisfaction.ResultsThe operation were successfully performed for all patients, with a median operation time of 75 minutes (IQR, 65-85 minutes), postoperative hospitalization stay of 48 hours (IQR, 48-72 hours), and the time to ambulation after operation of 24 hours (IQR, 24-24 hours). Sixty-three patients were followed-up and with a median follow-up time of 18 months (IQR, 13-20 months). Based on preoperative CLLSC classification, there were 72 stenotic zones, distributed 16 in zone 1, 6 in zone 2, 3 in zone 3, 2 in zone 4, 7 in zone 5, 34 in zones 1+2, 2 in zones 3+4, and 2 in zones 4+5. Perioperative complications occurred in 4 cases (6.3%), including 2 cases of intraoperative dural sac tear, 1 of preoperative numbness symptom aggravation, and 1 of postoperative urinary retention. VAS score of leg pain and ODI score at each time point after operation were significantly improved compared with those before operation (P<0.05). VAS scores of low back pain showed no significant difference between pre- and post-operation (P>0.05). At last follow-up, based on the modified Macnab criteria, 19 cases were excellent, 37 were good, 6 were fair, and 1 was poor, and the excellent and good rate was 88.9%. The reliability analysis showed that CLLSC had substantial intra-observer reliability in the geriatric population, with an average ICC of 0.78. There was also a substantial inter-observer reliability, with an average ICC of 0.73. While comparing the preoperative CLLSC results with the postoperative CLLSC results, 53 patients (73.6%) were in full agreement, 15 patients (20.8%) were in partial agreement, and 4 patients (5.6%) were not.ConclusionCLLSC has high reliability in the diagnosis of LSS in the geriatric patients. Combined FETD with CLLSC, accurate diagnosis, and minimal invasion can be performed to achieve safe and effective result.
ObjectivesTo compare and analyze existing pharmaceutical economic evaluations quality assessment instruments, and to provide suggestions on how to choose the most appropriate instrument.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect studies on existing pharmaceutical economic evaluations quality assessment instruments from inception to December, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and analyzed studies in terms of items, design methods, scopes and characteristics.ResultsTwelve original checklists with good reliability and validity were found. The first quality assessment method was designed in 1987 and the latest one was published in 2013. The number of checklist items ranged from 11 to 61.ConclusionThere is no consolidated method for assessing the quality of pharmaceutical economics evaluations. Evaluators can choose appropriate evaluation tools according to the purpose, type and operability of evaluation.
ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to translate the U-CEP scale into Chinese, and evaluate the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the U-CEP, in order to provide a measurement and evaluation tool for clinical epidemiology education and research. MethodsThe U-CEP scale was translated and adapted using the Brislin translation model. A nationwide survey of clinicians was conducted using the Chinese version of the U-CEP. Item analysis, reliability analysis, and validity analysis were performed using SPSS 26.0 software. ResultsThe discriminant validity analysis showed that except for item 4, the critical value (CR) of the other twenty-four items differed significantly between high and low groups (P<0.01), with CR values ranging from 2.902 to 14.609. The ITCs of the 25 items were all positive, with 5 items having an ITC<0.15(20%), 2 items having ITC≥0.15~0.20 (8%), 6 items having ITC≥0.20~0.40 (24%) and 12 items having ITC≥0.40 (48%). In terms of reliability, the overall Cronbach’s α coefficient of the Chinese version of the U-CEP was 0.80, with Cronbach’s α coefficient ranging from 0.752 to 0.805 when deleting each item one by one. The test-retest reliability was 0.848 (P<0.001). The alternative-form reliability was 0.838 (P<0.001). In terms of validity, expert analysis showed that the content validity of the Chinese version of the U-CEP was good. The construct validity analysis showed that the cumulative contribution rate of the 25 items was 57.50%. No respondent scored full marks or zero marks, indicating that no ceiling or floor effects were found. There were statistically significant differences in the total scores among clinicians with different educational backgrounds or with or without systematic learning of relevant knowledge (P<0.05). ConclusionThe Chinese version of the U-CEP has good reliability and validity, as well as good cultural adaptability. It can effectively assess a physician's knowledge of clinical epidemiology.
At present, the network meta-analysis has been rapidly developed and widely used, and it has the characteristic of quantifying and comparing the relative advantages of two or more different interventions for a single health outcome. However, comparison of multiple interventions has increased the complexity of drawing conclusions from network meta-analysis, and ignorance of the certainty of evidence has also led to misleading conclusions. Recently, the GRADE (grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation) working group proposed two approaches for obtaining conclusions from a network meta-analysis of interventions, namely, the partially contextualised framework and the minimally contextualised framework. When using partially contextualised framework, authors should establish ranges of magnitudes of effect that represent a trivial to no effect, minimal but important effect, moderate effect, and large effect. The guiding principles of this framework are that interventions should be grouped in categories based on the magnitude of the effect and its benefit or harm; and that when classifying, consider the point estimates, the rankings, and the certainty of the evidence comprehensively to draw conclusions. This article employs a case to describe and explain the principles and four steps of partially contextualised framework to provide guidance for the application of this GRADE approach in the interpretation of results and conclusions drawing from a network meta-analysis.