社区老年人临床身体弹性评估量表(CHEES)的信度和效度。

IF 4.3
Yiwen Xing , Pan Liu , Wenhua Yu , Yiwei Zhao , Zhibin Wang , Yue Wu , Xue Gao , Yu Wang , Yansu Guo , Yumin Wang , Yi Tang , Lina Ma
{"title":"社区老年人临床身体弹性评估量表(CHEES)的信度和效度。","authors":"Yiwen Xing ,&nbsp;Pan Liu ,&nbsp;Wenhua Yu ,&nbsp;Yiwei Zhao ,&nbsp;Zhibin Wang ,&nbsp;Yue Wu ,&nbsp;Xue Gao ,&nbsp;Yu Wang ,&nbsp;Yansu Guo ,&nbsp;Yumin Wang ,&nbsp;Yi Tang ,&nbsp;Lina Ma","doi":"10.1016/j.exger.2025.112818","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Physical resilience is closely related to healthy aging and refers to the ability of an individual to recover or maintain function after a stressor. However, tools for assessing physical resilience among community-dwelling older adults in China are lacking. We previously developed a 14-item Clinical pHysical rEsilience assEssment Scale (CHEES) in Chinese older adults.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To determine the reliability and validity of the CHEES among community-dwelling older adults.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A total of 1934 older adults from the Beijing community were included. The acceptability of the scale was evaluated by scale acceptance rate, scale qualification rate, and scale completion time. The reliability of the scale was evaluated from the aspects of internal consistency, split-half, and test-retest reliability. The validity of the scale was evaluated in terms of content, construct, and criterion validity.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The average age of the 1934 older adults was 69.73 ± 5.95 years, of whom 1219 were female (63.03 %). The CHEES scale acceptance and qualification rate were both 100 %, and the scale completion time was 2–3 min. The Cronbach's alpha, Spearman–Brown, and Guttman's split-half coefficients for the total scale were 0.733, 0.508, and 0.507, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha, Spearman–Brown, and Guttman's split-half coefficients were 0.567, 0.252, and 0.195 for the intrinsic capacity dimension; 0.768, 0.826, and 0.759 for the adapt to change dimension; and 0.646, 0.554, and 0.554 for the external support dimension, respectively. In the test-retest reliability analysis, the intraclass correlation coefficient for the total scores of the two assessments was 0.915. Further exploratory factor analysis showed that the cumulative variance contribution rate of the common factor was 59.91 %, with factor loadings for each item ranging from 0.472 to 0.858. The Spearman correlation coefficient between CHEES and the Barthel index was 0.110.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The CHEES exhibits good reliability and validity; therefore, it can be used as a reliable tool for evaluating physical resilience of older adults in community settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94003,"journal":{"name":"Experimental gerontology","volume":"208 ","pages":"Article 112818"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability and validity of the Clinical pHysical rEsilience assEssment Scale (CHEES) in community-dwelling older adults\",\"authors\":\"Yiwen Xing ,&nbsp;Pan Liu ,&nbsp;Wenhua Yu ,&nbsp;Yiwei Zhao ,&nbsp;Zhibin Wang ,&nbsp;Yue Wu ,&nbsp;Xue Gao ,&nbsp;Yu Wang ,&nbsp;Yansu Guo ,&nbsp;Yumin Wang ,&nbsp;Yi Tang ,&nbsp;Lina Ma\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.exger.2025.112818\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Physical resilience is closely related to healthy aging and refers to the ability of an individual to recover or maintain function after a stressor. However, tools for assessing physical resilience among community-dwelling older adults in China are lacking. We previously developed a 14-item Clinical pHysical rEsilience assEssment Scale (CHEES) in Chinese older adults.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To determine the reliability and validity of the CHEES among community-dwelling older adults.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A total of 1934 older adults from the Beijing community were included. The acceptability of the scale was evaluated by scale acceptance rate, scale qualification rate, and scale completion time. The reliability of the scale was evaluated from the aspects of internal consistency, split-half, and test-retest reliability. The validity of the scale was evaluated in terms of content, construct, and criterion validity.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The average age of the 1934 older adults was 69.73 ± 5.95 years, of whom 1219 were female (63.03 %). The CHEES scale acceptance and qualification rate were both 100 %, and the scale completion time was 2–3 min. The Cronbach's alpha, Spearman–Brown, and Guttman's split-half coefficients for the total scale were 0.733, 0.508, and 0.507, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha, Spearman–Brown, and Guttman's split-half coefficients were 0.567, 0.252, and 0.195 for the intrinsic capacity dimension; 0.768, 0.826, and 0.759 for the adapt to change dimension; and 0.646, 0.554, and 0.554 for the external support dimension, respectively. In the test-retest reliability analysis, the intraclass correlation coefficient for the total scores of the two assessments was 0.915. Further exploratory factor analysis showed that the cumulative variance contribution rate of the common factor was 59.91 %, with factor loadings for each item ranging from 0.472 to 0.858. The Spearman correlation coefficient between CHEES and the Barthel index was 0.110.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The CHEES exhibits good reliability and validity; therefore, it can be used as a reliable tool for evaluating physical resilience of older adults in community settings.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experimental gerontology\",\"volume\":\"208 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112818\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experimental gerontology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0531556525001470\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental gerontology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0531556525001470","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:身体恢复力与健康老龄化密切相关,是指个体在受到压力后恢复或维持功能的能力。然而,中国缺乏评估社区老年人身体恢复能力的工具。我们之前在中国老年人中开发了一个14项临床身体弹性评估量表(CHEES)。目的:确定社区居住老年人CHEES的信度和效度。方法:选取北京社区老年人1934例。通过量表合格率、量表合格率和量表完成时间来评价量表的可接受性。量表的信度从内部一致性、分半信度和重测信度三个方面进行评价。量表的效度从内容、结构和标准效度三个方面进行评估。结果:1934例老年人平均年龄69.73 ± 5.95 岁,其中女性1219人(63.03 %)。CHEES量表的验收合格率和合格率均为100 %,量表完成时间为2-3 min。总量表的Cronbach’s alpha系数、Spearman-Brown系数和Guttman’s split-half系数分别为0.733、0.508和0.507。内在能力维度的Cronbach’s alpha系数、Spearman-Brown系数和Guttman’s split-half系数分别为0.567、0.252和0.195;0.768、0.826、0.759为适应变化尺寸;外部支持维度分别为0.646、0.554、0.554。在重测信度分析中,两项评价总分的类内相关系数为0.915。进一步的探索性因子分析表明,公共因子的累积方差贡献率为59.91 %,各条目的因子负荷范围为0.472 ~ 0.858。CHEES与Barthel指数的Spearman相关系数为0.110。结论:CHEES具有良好的信效度;因此,它可以作为一个可靠的工具来评估老年人的身体弹性在社区设置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reliability and validity of the Clinical pHysical rEsilience assEssment Scale (CHEES) in community-dwelling older adults

Background

Physical resilience is closely related to healthy aging and refers to the ability of an individual to recover or maintain function after a stressor. However, tools for assessing physical resilience among community-dwelling older adults in China are lacking. We previously developed a 14-item Clinical pHysical rEsilience assEssment Scale (CHEES) in Chinese older adults.

Objective

To determine the reliability and validity of the CHEES among community-dwelling older adults.

Methods

A total of 1934 older adults from the Beijing community were included. The acceptability of the scale was evaluated by scale acceptance rate, scale qualification rate, and scale completion time. The reliability of the scale was evaluated from the aspects of internal consistency, split-half, and test-retest reliability. The validity of the scale was evaluated in terms of content, construct, and criterion validity.

Results

The average age of the 1934 older adults was 69.73 ± 5.95 years, of whom 1219 were female (63.03 %). The CHEES scale acceptance and qualification rate were both 100 %, and the scale completion time was 2–3 min. The Cronbach's alpha, Spearman–Brown, and Guttman's split-half coefficients for the total scale were 0.733, 0.508, and 0.507, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha, Spearman–Brown, and Guttman's split-half coefficients were 0.567, 0.252, and 0.195 for the intrinsic capacity dimension; 0.768, 0.826, and 0.759 for the adapt to change dimension; and 0.646, 0.554, and 0.554 for the external support dimension, respectively. In the test-retest reliability analysis, the intraclass correlation coefficient for the total scores of the two assessments was 0.915. Further exploratory factor analysis showed that the cumulative variance contribution rate of the common factor was 59.91 %, with factor loadings for each item ranging from 0.472 to 0.858. The Spearman correlation coefficient between CHEES and the Barthel index was 0.110.

Conclusions

The CHEES exhibits good reliability and validity; therefore, it can be used as a reliable tool for evaluating physical resilience of older adults in community settings.
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
Experimental gerontology
Experimental gerontology Ageing, Biochemistry, Geriatrics and Gerontology
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
66 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信