HONOS-LD量表的探索性因素分析

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
R. Turton
{"title":"HONOS-LD量表的探索性因素分析","authors":"R. Turton","doi":"10.1108/amhid-05-2019-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this study is to identify clinically meaningful groups of Health of the Nation Scales Learning Disabilities (HONOS-LD) single-item scales that might be used as short scales that are more reliable than single-item scale scores and more focused than the sum of scale scores. The single-item scales are likely to be unreliable in many applications. The sum of scale scores is a heterogeneous measure that is not a good representative of any specific difficulties that people who have intellectual disabilities may have and the effects of interventions on any specific difficulties may be masked by fluctuations in the ratings of other scales.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA total of 2,109 pseudonymised complete HONOS-LD ratings were factor-analysed using principal factor extraction and oblimin rotation. Three-, four- and five-factor rotated patterns were examined.\n\n\nFindings\nThree factors that each have three or more strong loadings (≥|0.50|) were identified that jointly included 11 single-item scales: one representing problems with cognitive competencies, one representing depressive phenomena or other mood problems and one representing problems with social competencies. A weaker factor that represents behaviour that challenges services is indicated; it includes five single-item scales. Both the cognitive competencies and social competencies groups of items were also reported in a previous study by Skelly and D’Antonio (2008) and may be stable. The present study’s factor representing behavioural difficulty has some similarity to Skelly and D’Antonio’s “functional behaviour and attachment disturbance” group. In other respects, the present study and the previous study differ.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe outcomes of these factor analyses indicate that some of the single-item scales can be combined into groups. However, the specific groups found in this study must be regarded as possibly unstable because of the likelihood of weak inter-rater reliability in HONOS-LD data and differences between this analysis and Skelly and D’Antonio’s. Further research is needed to support or modify them.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe cognitive competence and social competence groups of items may be used as subscales if they are convenient. The groups representing mood and behavioural problems should be supported by further research before being used.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis is the second published factor analysis of the HONOS-LD and includes a much larger data set than the first. It has some similarities to and differences from the first and is a further step in the process of identifying useful groupings of HONOS-LD single-item scales.\n","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/amhid-05-2019-0013","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An exploratory factor analysis of HONOS-LD scales\",\"authors\":\"R. Turton\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/amhid-05-2019-0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this study is to identify clinically meaningful groups of Health of the Nation Scales Learning Disabilities (HONOS-LD) single-item scales that might be used as short scales that are more reliable than single-item scale scores and more focused than the sum of scale scores. The single-item scales are likely to be unreliable in many applications. The sum of scale scores is a heterogeneous measure that is not a good representative of any specific difficulties that people who have intellectual disabilities may have and the effects of interventions on any specific difficulties may be masked by fluctuations in the ratings of other scales.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nA total of 2,109 pseudonymised complete HONOS-LD ratings were factor-analysed using principal factor extraction and oblimin rotation. Three-, four- and five-factor rotated patterns were examined.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThree factors that each have three or more strong loadings (≥|0.50|) were identified that jointly included 11 single-item scales: one representing problems with cognitive competencies, one representing depressive phenomena or other mood problems and one representing problems with social competencies. A weaker factor that represents behaviour that challenges services is indicated; it includes five single-item scales. Both the cognitive competencies and social competencies groups of items were also reported in a previous study by Skelly and D’Antonio (2008) and may be stable. The present study’s factor representing behavioural difficulty has some similarity to Skelly and D’Antonio’s “functional behaviour and attachment disturbance” group. In other respects, the present study and the previous study differ.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe outcomes of these factor analyses indicate that some of the single-item scales can be combined into groups. However, the specific groups found in this study must be regarded as possibly unstable because of the likelihood of weak inter-rater reliability in HONOS-LD data and differences between this analysis and Skelly and D’Antonio’s. Further research is needed to support or modify them.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nThe cognitive competence and social competence groups of items may be used as subscales if they are convenient. The groups representing mood and behavioural problems should be supported by further research before being used.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis is the second published factor analysis of the HONOS-LD and includes a much larger data set than the first. It has some similarities to and differences from the first and is a further step in the process of identifying useful groupings of HONOS-LD single-item scales.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/amhid-05-2019-0013\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/amhid-05-2019-0013\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/amhid-05-2019-0013","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

目的本研究的目的是确定具有临床意义的国家健康量表学习障碍(HONOS-LD)单项量表组,这些组可以作为比单项量表得分更可靠、比量表得分之和更集中的短量表。单项目量表在许多应用中可能不可靠。量表得分总和是一种不同的衡量标准,不能很好地代表智力残疾者可能遇到的任何具体困难,干预措施对任何具体困难的影响可能被其他量表评分的波动所掩盖。设计/方法/方法使用主因子提取和oblimin旋转对总共2109个假名完整的HONOS-LD评分进行因子分析。三,四和五因素旋转模式进行了检查。结果确定了三个因素,每个因素有三个或三个以上的强负荷(≥|0.50|),共包括11个单项量表:一个代表认知能力问题,一个代表抑郁现象或其他情绪问题,一个代表社会能力问题。指出了代表挑战服务的行为的较弱因素;它包括五个单项量表。Skelly和D 'Antonio(2008)在之前的研究中也报道了项目的认知能力和社会能力组,并且可能是稳定的。本研究的行为困难因素与Skelly和D 'Antonio的“功能性行为和依恋障碍”组有一定的相似性。在其他方面,本研究与先前的研究有所不同。研究局限/启示这些因素分析的结果表明,一些单项量表可以合并成组。然而,由于HONOS-LD数据可能存在较弱的评分间信度,并且本分析与Skelly和D 'Antonio的分析存在差异,因此本研究中发现的特定组必须被视为可能不稳定。需要进一步的研究来支持或修改它们。实际意义项目的认知能力组和社会能力组可以方便地用作子量表。在使用之前,代表情绪和行为问题的组应该得到进一步研究的支持。原创性/价值这是第二次发表的HONOS-LD因子分析,包含的数据集比第一次大得多。它与第一个量表既有相似之处,也有不同之处,是确定HONOS-LD单项量表有用分组过程中的又一步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An exploratory factor analysis of HONOS-LD scales
Purpose The purpose of this study is to identify clinically meaningful groups of Health of the Nation Scales Learning Disabilities (HONOS-LD) single-item scales that might be used as short scales that are more reliable than single-item scale scores and more focused than the sum of scale scores. The single-item scales are likely to be unreliable in many applications. The sum of scale scores is a heterogeneous measure that is not a good representative of any specific difficulties that people who have intellectual disabilities may have and the effects of interventions on any specific difficulties may be masked by fluctuations in the ratings of other scales. Design/methodology/approach A total of 2,109 pseudonymised complete HONOS-LD ratings were factor-analysed using principal factor extraction and oblimin rotation. Three-, four- and five-factor rotated patterns were examined. Findings Three factors that each have three or more strong loadings (≥|0.50|) were identified that jointly included 11 single-item scales: one representing problems with cognitive competencies, one representing depressive phenomena or other mood problems and one representing problems with social competencies. A weaker factor that represents behaviour that challenges services is indicated; it includes five single-item scales. Both the cognitive competencies and social competencies groups of items were also reported in a previous study by Skelly and D’Antonio (2008) and may be stable. The present study’s factor representing behavioural difficulty has some similarity to Skelly and D’Antonio’s “functional behaviour and attachment disturbance” group. In other respects, the present study and the previous study differ. Research limitations/implications The outcomes of these factor analyses indicate that some of the single-item scales can be combined into groups. However, the specific groups found in this study must be regarded as possibly unstable because of the likelihood of weak inter-rater reliability in HONOS-LD data and differences between this analysis and Skelly and D’Antonio’s. Further research is needed to support or modify them. Practical implications The cognitive competence and social competence groups of items may be used as subscales if they are convenient. The groups representing mood and behavioural problems should be supported by further research before being used. Originality/value This is the second published factor analysis of the HONOS-LD and includes a much larger data set than the first. It has some similarities to and differences from the first and is a further step in the process of identifying useful groupings of HONOS-LD single-item scales.
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
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the 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