Scale Development of the Osteoarthritis Conceptualisation Questionnaire: Phase 3 Convergent Validity and Test-retest Reliability.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Brian W Pulling, Tasha R Stanton, Felicity Braithwaite, David S Butler, Anna R Vogelzang, G Lorimer Moseley, Erin MacIntyre, Mark J Catley
{"title":"Scale Development of the Osteoarthritis Conceptualisation Questionnaire: Phase 3 Convergent Validity and Test-retest Reliability.","authors":"Brian W Pulling, Tasha R Stanton, Felicity Braithwaite, David S Butler, Anna R Vogelzang, G Lorimer Moseley, Erin MacIntyre, Mark J Catley","doi":"10.1016/j.jpain.2025.105433","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Osteoarthritis Conceptualisation Questionnaire (OACQ) aims to evaluate people's understanding of osteoarthritis. This study aimed to evaluate construct validity and reliability among those with painful knee osteoarthritis. Using previously collected data (n=454, n=336 female; 64 ± 9yrs) and a second confirmatory sample (n=64, n= 47 female; 67 ± 8yrs), the scale properties of the four-dimensional (i.e., subscale) OACQ were evaluated. Both samples were compared to a Rasch model indicative of measurement to evaluate the targeting, category ordering, unidimensionality, local dependence, person fit, internal consistency, and differential item functioning (DIF). Convergent validity was evaluated in both samples, evaluating associations between the OACQ and related assessments. Test-retest reliability was evaluated in the second sample over a one-week period. Results showed that targeting was poor, although all OACQ subscales showed unidimensionality. Person fit was below the acceptable threshold for two subscales; however, sensitivity analysis revealed no specific cause for this misfit. Internal consistency was good for all subscales, and DIF was consistent with expected associations between measures. Rasch findings were supported in the confirmatory sample. The OACQ had correlations with related measures supportive of convergent validity and demonstrates good to excellent reliability (ICC = 0.89, 95%CI [0.80 to 0.94]). This study provides evidence supportive of validity and reliability of the OACQ as an assessment of how people understand knee osteoarthritis. It has utility as a tool for clinicians and researchers to understand how their patients/participants conceptualise knee osteoarthritis, its causes and consequences, contributors to pain, and optimal management approaches. PERSPECTIVE: The OACQ is a 36 item, four-domain questionnaire with evidence for construct, structural, and convergent validity, as well as reliability for people with knee osteoarthritis. The OACQ can be used to comprehensively evaluate the conceptual framework of painful knee osteoarthritis.</p>","PeriodicalId":51095,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":"105433"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2025.105433","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Osteoarthritis Conceptualisation Questionnaire (OACQ) aims to evaluate people's understanding of osteoarthritis. This study aimed to evaluate construct validity and reliability among those with painful knee osteoarthritis. Using previously collected data (n=454, n=336 female; 64 ± 9yrs) and a second confirmatory sample (n=64, n= 47 female; 67 ± 8yrs), the scale properties of the four-dimensional (i.e., subscale) OACQ were evaluated. Both samples were compared to a Rasch model indicative of measurement to evaluate the targeting, category ordering, unidimensionality, local dependence, person fit, internal consistency, and differential item functioning (DIF). Convergent validity was evaluated in both samples, evaluating associations between the OACQ and related assessments. Test-retest reliability was evaluated in the second sample over a one-week period. Results showed that targeting was poor, although all OACQ subscales showed unidimensionality. Person fit was below the acceptable threshold for two subscales; however, sensitivity analysis revealed no specific cause for this misfit. Internal consistency was good for all subscales, and DIF was consistent with expected associations between measures. Rasch findings were supported in the confirmatory sample. The OACQ had correlations with related measures supportive of convergent validity and demonstrates good to excellent reliability (ICC = 0.89, 95%CI [0.80 to 0.94]). This study provides evidence supportive of validity and reliability of the OACQ as an assessment of how people understand knee osteoarthritis. It has utility as a tool for clinicians and researchers to understand how their patients/participants conceptualise knee osteoarthritis, its causes and consequences, contributors to pain, and optimal management approaches. PERSPECTIVE: The OACQ is a 36 item, four-domain questionnaire with evidence for construct, structural, and convergent validity, as well as reliability for people with knee osteoarthritis. The OACQ can be used to comprehensively evaluate the conceptual framework of painful knee osteoarthritis.

骨关节炎概念化问卷的量表开发:第三阶段的收敛效度和重测信度。
骨关节炎概念化问卷(OACQ)旨在评估人们对骨关节炎的认识。本研究旨在评估疼痛性膝骨关节炎患者的结构效度和信度。使用先前收集的数据(n=454, n=336名女性;64±9岁)和第二个确认样本(n=64, n= 47女性;(67±8)年),评估OACQ的四维(即子量表)量表性质。将两个样本与Rasch模型进行比较,以评估目标、类别排序、单维性、局部依赖性、人契合度、内部一致性和差异项目功能(DIF)。对两个样本进行收敛效度评估,评估OACQ与相关评估之间的关联。在一周的时间内对第二个样本进行重测信度评估。结果表明,尽管所有OACQ分量表均呈现单维性,但其针对性较差。两个分量表的个人契合度低于可接受阈值;然而,敏感性分析没有揭示这种不匹配的具体原因。所有子量表的内部一致性都很好,并且DIF与测量之间的预期关联一致。验证性样本支持Rasch的发现。OACQ与支持收敛效度的相关测量具有相关性,具有良好至极好的信度(ICC = 0.89, 95%CI[0.80 ~ 0.94])。本研究提供证据支持OACQ作为评估人们如何理解膝骨关节炎的有效性和可靠性。它是临床医生和研究人员了解他们的患者/参与者如何概念化膝骨关节炎、其原因和后果、疼痛的原因和最佳管理方法的工具。观点:OACQ是一份36题、四域问卷,对膝关节骨关节炎患者具有结构效度、结构效度和趋同效度的证据。OACQ可用于综合评价疼痛性膝骨关节炎的概念框架。
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
Journal of Pain
Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.50%
发文量
441
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pain publishes original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. Articles selected for publication in the Journal are most commonly reports of original clinical research or reports of original basic research. In addition, invited critical reviews, including meta analyses of drugs for pain management, invited commentaries on reviews, and exceptional case studies are published in the Journal. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals to publish original research.
×
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