METHODS: We reviewed measures of decision quality and decision process in 86 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration systematic review of PtDAs. Data on development of the measures, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, feasibility, and acceptability were independently abstracted by 2 reviewers.
RESULTS: Information from 178 instances of use of measures was abstracted. Very few studies reported data on the performance of measures, with reliability (21%) and validity (16%) being the most common. Studies using new measures were less likely to include information about their psychometric performance. The review was limited to reporting of measures in studies included in the Cochrane review and did not consult prior publications.
CONCLUSIONS: Very little is reported about the development or performance of measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of PtDAs in published trials. Minimum reporting standards are proposed to enable authors to prepare study reports, editors and reviewers to evaluate submitted papers, and readers to appraise published studies.
METHODS: Data from 87 patients with cervical cancer recruited from a referral hospital in Yogyakarta province, Indonesia, from an earlier study of health-related quality of life were used in this study. The differences among the utility scores derived from the four value sets were determined using the Friedman test. Performance of the psychometric properties of the four value sets versus visual analogue scale (VAS) was assessed. Intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots were used to test the agreement among the utility scores. Spearman ρ correlation coefficients were used to assess convergent validity between utility scores and patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. With respect to known-group validity, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to examine the differences in utility according to the stages of cancer.
RESULTS: There was significant difference among utility scores derived from the four value sets, among which the Malaysian value set yielded higher utility than the other three value sets. Utility obtained from the Malaysian value set had more agreements with VAS than the other value sets versus VAS (intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plot tests results). As for the validity, the four value sets showed equivalent psychometric properties as those that resulted from convergent and known-group validity tests.
CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of an Indonesian value set, the Malaysian value set was more preferable to be used compared with the other value sets. Further studies on the development of an Indonesian value set need to be conducted.
Methods: This is a cross-sectional survey. A convenient sample of 310 preclinical students of a public medical school in Malaysia were invited to participate. Validation data were collected using a revised 40-item, 5-point Likert scale learning space questionnaire. The questionnaires were administered online via a student e-learning platform. Data analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS version 24. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to examine the factor structure of the revised questionnaire to provide evidence for construct validity. To assess the internal consistency of the revised questionnaire, Cronbach's alpha coefficients (α) were computed across all the items as well as for items within each of the factor.
Results: A total of 223 (71.94%) preclinical students completed and returned the questionnaire. In the final analysis, exploratory factor analysis with principal axis factoring and an oblimin rotation identified a six-factor, 20-item factor solution. Reliability analysis reported good internal consistency for the revised questionnaire, with an overall Cronbach's alpha of 0.845, and Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.800 to 0.925 for the six factors.
Conclusions: This study established evidence for the construct validity and internal consistency of the revised questionnaire. The revised questionnaire appears to have utility as an instrument to investigate learning space preferences in Malaysian medical schools.
Methods: Manual sample size calculation using Microsoft Excel software and sample size tables were tabulated based on a single coefficient alpha and the comparison of two coefficients alpha.
Results: For a single coefficient alpha test, the approach by assuming the Cronbach's alpha coefficient equals to zero in the null hypothesis will yield a smaller sample size of less than 30 to achieve a minimum desired effect size of 0.7. However, setting the coefficient of Cronbach's alpha larger than zero in the null hypothesis could be necessary and this will yield larger sample size. For comparison of two coefficients of Cronbach's alpha, a larger sample size is needed when testing for smaller effect sizes.
Conclusions: In the assessment of the internal consistency of an instrument, the present study proposed the Cronbach's alpha's coefficient to be set at 0.5 in the null hypothesis and hence larger sample size is needed. For comparison of two coefficients' of Cronbach's alpha, justification is needed whether testing for extremely low and extremely large effect sizes are scientifically necessary.
METHODS: A cross sectional study by adopting European Quality of Life scale (EQ-5D) for the assessment of HRQoL was conducted. All registered HB patients attending two public hospitals in Quetta, Pakistan were approached for study. Descriptive statistics were used to describe demographic and disease related characteristics of the patients. HRQoL was scored using values adapted from the United Kingdom general population survey. EQ-5D scale scores were compared with Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis test. Standard multiple regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of HRQoL. All analyses were performed using SPSS v 16.0.
RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety HB patients were enrolled in the study. Majority of the participants (n = 126, 32.3%) were categorized in the age group of 18-27 years (36.07 ± 9.23). HRQoL was measured as poor in the current study patients (0.3498 ± 0.31785). The multivariate analysis revealed a significant model (F(10, 380) = 40.04, P
BACKGROUND: Nursing students are part of the future healthcare workforce; thus, being aware of their intention to work with older people would give valuable insights to nursing education and practice. Despite a plethora of research on measuring intention to work with older people, a valid and reliable instrument has not been identified.
DESIGN: A systematic literature review of evidence and psychometric properties.
DATA SOURCES: Eight database searches were conducted between 2006 - 2016.
REVIEW METHODS: English articles were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The COSMIN checklist was used to assess instruments reporting a psychometric evaluation of validity and reliability.
RESULTS: Of 41 studies identified for full text review, 36 met the inclusion criteria. Seven different types of instruments were identified for psychometric evaluation. Measures of reliability were reported in eight papers and validity in five papers. Evidence for each measurement property was limited, with each instrument demonstrating a lack of information on measurement properties. Based on the COSMIN checklist, the overall quality of the psychometric properties was rated as poor to good.
CONCLUSION: No single instrument was found to be optimal for use. Studies of high methodological quality are needed to properly assess the measurement properties of the instruments that are currently available. Until such studies are available, we recommend using existing instruments with caution.