A method for rapid assessment of visual ergonomics and lighting conditions (RAVEL): An in-depth development and psychometrics study.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Sayed Vahid Esmaeili, Reza Esmaeili, Mahnaz Shakerian, Habibollah Dehghan, Saeid Yazdanirad, Zahra Heidari, Ehsanollah Habibi
{"title":"A method for rapid assessment of visual ergonomics and lighting conditions (RAVEL): An in-depth development and psychometrics study.","authors":"Sayed Vahid Esmaeili, Reza Esmaeili, Mahnaz Shakerian, Habibollah Dehghan, Saeid Yazdanirad, Zahra Heidari, Ehsanollah Habibi","doi":"10.3233/WOR-240052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In workplaces heavily reliant on visual tasks, various factors can significantly influence an individual's performance, necessitating the use of reliable tools to identify and mitigate these factors.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to develop a swift assessment method for visual ergonomics and lighting conditions, evaluating its validity in real-world scenarios.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The questionnaire's content validity was determined by a panel of experts using the content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI). Construct validity was assessed through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and latent class analysis (LCA). Internal consistency was measured using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. The RAVEL index, derived from the calculated effect coefficients of items, classified total scores through receiver operator curves (ROCs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The rapid assessment method, comprising two parts with 30 items, demonstrated acceptable reliability with CVR, CVI, and Cronbach's alpha coefficient (α) at 0.75, 0.87, and 0.896, respectively. The EFA on the first part's 22 items identified three factors, confirmed by CFA. The LCA on the second part's eight items revealed that a two-class model best fit the data, with Bayesian information criterion (BIC) = 24249, 17, Akaik information criterion (AIC) = 2179.89, and an entropy R-squared of 0.83, indicating appropriate subject classification based on the model. The RAVEL score was categorized into three levels, with optimal cut points of 55 and 63.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In conclusion, the study demonstrated that this method based on visual ergonomics serves as a rapid and reliable tool for assessing visual ergonomic risks of display users in the workplace.</p>","PeriodicalId":51373,"journal":{"name":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-240052","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In workplaces heavily reliant on visual tasks, various factors can significantly influence an individual's performance, necessitating the use of reliable tools to identify and mitigate these factors.

Objective: This study aimed to develop a swift assessment method for visual ergonomics and lighting conditions, evaluating its validity in real-world scenarios.

Methods: The questionnaire's content validity was determined by a panel of experts using the content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI). Construct validity was assessed through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and latent class analysis (LCA). Internal consistency was measured using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. The RAVEL index, derived from the calculated effect coefficients of items, classified total scores through receiver operator curves (ROCs).

Results: The rapid assessment method, comprising two parts with 30 items, demonstrated acceptable reliability with CVR, CVI, and Cronbach's alpha coefficient (α) at 0.75, 0.87, and 0.896, respectively. The EFA on the first part's 22 items identified three factors, confirmed by CFA. The LCA on the second part's eight items revealed that a two-class model best fit the data, with Bayesian information criterion (BIC) = 24249, 17, Akaik information criterion (AIC) = 2179.89, and an entropy R-squared of 0.83, indicating appropriate subject classification based on the model. The RAVEL score was categorized into three levels, with optimal cut points of 55 and 63.

Conclusions: In conclusion, the study demonstrated that this method based on visual ergonomics serves as a rapid and reliable tool for assessing visual ergonomic risks of display users in the workplace.

视觉人体工程学和照明条件快速评估方法(RAVEL):深入开发和心理测量学研究。
背景:在严重依赖视觉任务的工作场所,各种因素会严重影响个人的工作表现,因此有必要使用可靠的工具来识别和缓解这些因素:本研究旨在为视觉工效学和照明条件开发一种快速评估方法,并评估其在真实世界场景中的有效性:调查问卷的内容效度由专家小组使用内容效度比(CVR)和内容效度指数(CVI)来确定。通过探索性因素分析(EFA)、确认性因素分析(CFA)和潜类分析(LCA)评估了结构效度。内部一致性采用 Cronbach's alpha 系数进行测量。根据计算出的项目效应系数得出的 RAVEL 指数通过接收者操作曲线(ROC)对总分进行分类:快速评估方法包括两部分共 30 个项目,其信度可接受,CVR、CVI 和 Cronbach's α 系数(α)分别为 0.75、0.87 和 0.896。对第一部分的 22 个项目进行的 EFA 分析确定了三个因子,并得到了 CFA 的确认。对第二部分 8 个项目进行的 LCA 显示,两类模型最适合数据,贝叶斯信息准则(BIC)= 24249,17,阿卡克信息准则(AIC)= 2179.89,熵 R 平方为 0.83,表明根据模型进行的科目分类是适当的。RAVEL 评分分为三级,最佳切点为 55 分和 63 分:总之,该研究表明,这种基于视觉人体工程学的方法是评估工作场所显示器使用者视觉人体工程学风险的快速、可靠的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation
Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
30.40%
发文量
739
期刊介绍: WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation is an interdisciplinary, international journal which publishes high quality peer-reviewed manuscripts covering the entire scope of the occupation of work. The journal''s subtitle has been deliberately laid out: The first goal is the prevention of illness, injury, and disability. When this goal is not achievable, the attention focuses on assessment to design client-centered intervention, rehabilitation, treatment, or controls that use scientific evidence to support best practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信