慢性阻塞性肺疾病量表中照顾者自我照顾贡献的效度和信度及照顾者自我效能感在自我照顾贡献量表中的作用。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Maria Matarese, Roberta Pendoni, Davide Ausili, Ercole Vellone, Maddalena De Maria
{"title":"慢性阻塞性肺疾病量表中照顾者自我照顾贡献的效度和信度及照顾者自我效能感在自我照顾贡献量表中的作用。","authors":"Maria Matarese,&nbsp;Roberta Pendoni,&nbsp;Davide Ausili,&nbsp;Ercole Vellone,&nbsp;Maddalena De Maria","doi":"10.1177/01632787221134712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study tested the construct validity and reliability of the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Inventory and the Caregiver Self-Efficacy in Contributing to Self-Care of COPD Scale. The two instruments were developed by modifying the Self-Care of COPD Inventory and Self-Care Self-Efficacy Scale in COPD into caregiver versions. The psychometric properties were tested in a convenience sample of 261 informal caregivers of COPD patients recruited in Italy in two cross-sectional studies. Structural validity was tested by confirmatory factor analysis, construct validity by posing several hypotheses, and internal consistency through factor score determinacy and global reliability index for multidimensional scales. In confirmatory factor analysis, the caregiver contribution to self-care maintenance, monitoring and management scales, composing the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of COPD Inventory, presented good fit indices. Global reliability indices ranged 0.75-0.88. The caregiver self-efficacy scale presented a comparative fit index of 0.96 and a global reliability index of 0.82. The caregiver contribution to self-care and the caregiver self-efficacy scales correlated moderately among themselves and with the patient versions of the scales, and scores were higher with caregiver-oriented dyadic care types and female caregivers. Our study provides evidence of the two instruments' construct validity and internal consistency.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":"46 3","pages":"255-269"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity and Reliability of Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Inventory and Caregiver Self-Efficacy in Contributing to Self-Care Scale.\",\"authors\":\"Maria Matarese,&nbsp;Roberta Pendoni,&nbsp;Davide Ausili,&nbsp;Ercole Vellone,&nbsp;Maddalena De Maria\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01632787221134712\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The study tested the construct validity and reliability of the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Inventory and the Caregiver Self-Efficacy in Contributing to Self-Care of COPD Scale. The two instruments were developed by modifying the Self-Care of COPD Inventory and Self-Care Self-Efficacy Scale in COPD into caregiver versions. The psychometric properties were tested in a convenience sample of 261 informal caregivers of COPD patients recruited in Italy in two cross-sectional studies. Structural validity was tested by confirmatory factor analysis, construct validity by posing several hypotheses, and internal consistency through factor score determinacy and global reliability index for multidimensional scales. In confirmatory factor analysis, the caregiver contribution to self-care maintenance, monitoring and management scales, composing the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of COPD Inventory, presented good fit indices. Global reliability indices ranged 0.75-0.88. The caregiver self-efficacy scale presented a comparative fit index of 0.96 and a global reliability index of 0.82. The caregiver contribution to self-care and the caregiver self-efficacy scales correlated moderately among themselves and with the patient versions of the scales, and scores were higher with caregiver-oriented dyadic care types and female caregivers. Our study provides evidence of the two instruments' construct validity and internal consistency.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evaluation & the Health Professions\",\"volume\":\"46 3\",\"pages\":\"255-269\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evaluation & the Health Professions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787221134712\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787221134712","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本研究检验了慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)照顾者自我照顾贡献量表和COPD照顾者自我照顾贡献量表的结构效度和信度。这两种工具是通过将COPD自我护理量表和COPD自我护理自我效能量表修改为护理者版本而开发的。在意大利的两项横断面研究中,对261名慢性阻塞性肺病患者的非正式护理人员的方便样本进行了心理测量特性测试。通过验证性因子分析检验结构效度,通过提出若干假设检验结构效度,通过多维尺度的因子得分确定性和整体信度指标检验内部一致性。在验证性因子分析中,护理者对自我护理维持、监测和管理的贡献量表组成的护理者对COPD自我护理的贡献量表具有较好的拟合指标。全球可靠性指数范围为0.75-0.88。照顾者自我效能感量表的比较拟合指数为0.96,整体信度指数为0.82。照顾者对自我照顾的贡献和照顾者自我效能感量表在照顾者自身和患者版本之间呈适度相关,以照顾者为导向的二元照顾类型和女性照顾者得分较高。我们的研究提供了两个工具的结构效度和内部一致性的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validity and Reliability of Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Inventory and Caregiver Self-Efficacy in Contributing to Self-Care Scale.

The study tested the construct validity and reliability of the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Inventory and the Caregiver Self-Efficacy in Contributing to Self-Care of COPD Scale. The two instruments were developed by modifying the Self-Care of COPD Inventory and Self-Care Self-Efficacy Scale in COPD into caregiver versions. The psychometric properties were tested in a convenience sample of 261 informal caregivers of COPD patients recruited in Italy in two cross-sectional studies. Structural validity was tested by confirmatory factor analysis, construct validity by posing several hypotheses, and internal consistency through factor score determinacy and global reliability index for multidimensional scales. In confirmatory factor analysis, the caregiver contribution to self-care maintenance, monitoring and management scales, composing the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of COPD Inventory, presented good fit indices. Global reliability indices ranged 0.75-0.88. The caregiver self-efficacy scale presented a comparative fit index of 0.96 and a global reliability index of 0.82. The caregiver contribution to self-care and the caregiver self-efficacy scales correlated moderately among themselves and with the patient versions of the scales, and scores were higher with caregiver-oriented dyadic care types and female caregivers. Our study provides evidence of the two instruments' construct validity and internal consistency.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evaluation & the Health Professions is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal that provides health-related professionals with state-of-the-art methodological, measurement, and statistical tools for conceptualizing the etiology of health promotion and problems, and developing, implementing, and evaluating health programs, teaching and training services, and products that pertain to a myriad of health dimensions. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 31 days
×
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