The Chinese Version of the DigiHealthCom (Digital Health Competence) Instrument for Assessing Digital Health Competence of Health Care Professionals: Translation, Adaptation, and Validation Study.

IF 2.6 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JMIR Human Factors Pub Date : 2025-03-21 DOI:10.2196/65373
Lu Gao, Meilian Chen, Jingxin Wei, Jinni Wang, Xiaoyan Liao
{"title":"The Chinese Version of the DigiHealthCom (Digital Health Competence) Instrument for Assessing Digital Health Competence of Health Care Professionals: Translation, Adaptation, and Validation Study.","authors":"Lu Gao, Meilian Chen, Jingxin Wei, Jinni Wang, Xiaoyan Liao","doi":"10.2196/65373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Digital health competence is increasingly recognized as a core competence for health care professionals. A comprehensive evaluation of knowledge, skills, performance, values, and attitudes necessary to adapt to evolving digital health technologies is essential. DigiHealthCom (Digital Health Competence) is a well-established instrument designed to assess digital health competence across diverse health care professionals.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt DigiHealthCom into simplified Chinese (Mandarin) and verify its reliability and validity in assessing digital health competence of Chinese health care professionals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>DigiHealthCom was translated into Chinese following the guideline proposed by its original developers. The cultural adaptation involved expert review and cognitive interviewing. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, content validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and factor structure were examined. Item analysis tested item discrimination, item correlation, and item homogeneity. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach α, and test-retest reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Content validity was assessed through both item and scale content validity indices. Convergent validity was measured by the Average Variance Extracted and Composite Reliability, while discriminant validity was measured by the heterotrait-monotrait ratio. A five-dimension model of DigiHealthCom was confirmed using confirmatory factor analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The finalized Chinese version of the DigiHealthCom was completed after addressing differences between the back-translations and the original version. No discrepancies affecting item clarity were reported during cognitive interviewing. The validation process involved 398 eligible health care professionals from 36 cities across 15 provinces in China, with 43 participants undergoing a retest after a 2-week interval. Critical ratio values (range 16.05-23.77, P<.001), item-total correlation coefficients (range 0.69-0.89), and Cronbach α if the item deleted (range 0.91-0.96) indicated satisfactory item discrimination, item correlation, and item homogeneity. Cronbach α for dimensions and the scale ranged from 0.94 to 0.98, indicating good internal consistency. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.90 (95% CI 0.81-0.95), indicating good test-retest reliability. Item content validity index ranged from 0.82 to 1.00, and the scale content validity index was 0.97, indicating satisfactory content validity. Convergent validity (average variance extracted: 0.60-0.79; composite reliability: 0.94-0.95) and divergent validity (heterotrait-monotrait ratio: 0.72-0.89) were satisfactory. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed a well-fit five-dimension model (robust chi-square to df ratio=3.10, comparative fit index=0.91, Tucker-Lewis index=0.90, incremental fit index=0.91, root-mean-square error of approximation=0.07, standardized root-mean-square residual=0.05), with each item having a factor loading exceeding 0.40.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Chinese version of DigiHealthCom has been proved to be reliable and valid. It is now available for assessing digital health competence among Chinese health care professionals. This assessment can be used to guide health care policy makers and educators in designing comprehensive and implementable educational programs and interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":36351,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Human Factors","volume":"12 ","pages":"e65373"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/65373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Digital health competence is increasingly recognized as a core competence for health care professionals. A comprehensive evaluation of knowledge, skills, performance, values, and attitudes necessary to adapt to evolving digital health technologies is essential. DigiHealthCom (Digital Health Competence) is a well-established instrument designed to assess digital health competence across diverse health care professionals.

Objective: This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt DigiHealthCom into simplified Chinese (Mandarin) and verify its reliability and validity in assessing digital health competence of Chinese health care professionals.

Methods: DigiHealthCom was translated into Chinese following the guideline proposed by its original developers. The cultural adaptation involved expert review and cognitive interviewing. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, content validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and factor structure were examined. Item analysis tested item discrimination, item correlation, and item homogeneity. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach α, and test-retest reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Content validity was assessed through both item and scale content validity indices. Convergent validity was measured by the Average Variance Extracted and Composite Reliability, while discriminant validity was measured by the heterotrait-monotrait ratio. A five-dimension model of DigiHealthCom was confirmed using confirmatory factor analysis.

Results: The finalized Chinese version of the DigiHealthCom was completed after addressing differences between the back-translations and the original version. No discrepancies affecting item clarity were reported during cognitive interviewing. The validation process involved 398 eligible health care professionals from 36 cities across 15 provinces in China, with 43 participants undergoing a retest after a 2-week interval. Critical ratio values (range 16.05-23.77, P<.001), item-total correlation coefficients (range 0.69-0.89), and Cronbach α if the item deleted (range 0.91-0.96) indicated satisfactory item discrimination, item correlation, and item homogeneity. Cronbach α for dimensions and the scale ranged from 0.94 to 0.98, indicating good internal consistency. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.90 (95% CI 0.81-0.95), indicating good test-retest reliability. Item content validity index ranged from 0.82 to 1.00, and the scale content validity index was 0.97, indicating satisfactory content validity. Convergent validity (average variance extracted: 0.60-0.79; composite reliability: 0.94-0.95) and divergent validity (heterotrait-monotrait ratio: 0.72-0.89) were satisfactory. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed a well-fit five-dimension model (robust chi-square to df ratio=3.10, comparative fit index=0.91, Tucker-Lewis index=0.90, incremental fit index=0.91, root-mean-square error of approximation=0.07, standardized root-mean-square residual=0.05), with each item having a factor loading exceeding 0.40.

Conclusions: The Chinese version of DigiHealthCom has been proved to be reliable and valid. It is now available for assessing digital health competence among Chinese health care professionals. This assessment can be used to guide health care policy makers and educators in designing comprehensive and implementable educational programs and interventions.

背景:数字医疗能力日益被视为医疗保健专业人员的核心能力。全面评估适应不断发展的数字医疗技术所需的知识、技能、绩效、价值观和态度至关重要。DigiHealthCom(数字健康能力)是一种成熟的工具,旨在评估不同医护专业人员的数字健康能力:本研究旨在将 DigiHealthCom 翻译成简体中文(普通话)并进行文化适应性调整,验证其在评估中国医护人员数字健康能力方面的可靠性和有效性:方法:DigiHealthCom按照其原始开发者提出的指南被翻译成中文。文化适应包括专家审查和认知访谈。对问卷的内部一致性、重测信度、内容效度、收敛效度、判别效度和因子结构进行了检验。项目分析测试了项目区分度、项目相关性和项目同质性。内部一致性采用 Cronbach α 进行评估,测试再测信度采用类内相关系数进行测量。内容效度通过项目和量表内容效度指数进行评估。收敛效度通过平均方差提取率和综合信度来衡量,而判别效度则通过异质-单质比率来衡量。通过确认性因素分析,确认了 DigiHealthCom 的五维模型:在解决了回译版本与原始版本之间的差异之后,完成了 DigiHealthCom 的中文最终版本。在认知访谈过程中,没有发现影响项目清晰度的差异。来自中国 15 个省 36 个城市的 398 名符合条件的医护人员参与了验证过程,其中 43 名参与者在间隔两周后接受了重测。临界比率值(范围为 16.05-23.77,PC 结论)为 0:DigiHealthCom 中文版已被证明是可靠有效的。现在,它可用于评估中国医护人员的数字健康能力。该评估可用于指导医疗政策制定者和教育工作者设计全面、可实施的教育计划和干预措施。
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
JMIR Human Factors
JMIR Human Factors Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
123
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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