METHODS: The original HCAPHS in English was translated into Malay based on the established guideline. The content validation involved an expert panel of 10 members, including patients. The face validation pilot testing of the HCAHPS-Malay version was conducted among 10 discharged patients. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) used principal axis factor, and varimax rotation was established based on a cross-sectional study conducted among 200 discharged patients from Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (Hospital USM).
RESULTS: The overall content validity index was 0.87, and the universal face validity index was 0.82. From the EFA, the factor loading value ranged from 0.652 to 0.961 within nine domains. The internal consistency reliability with Cronbach's alpha was 0.844.
CONCLUSION: The HCAHPS-Malay is a reliable and valid tool to determine patients' perception of healthcare services among inpatients in Hospital USM based on the content and face validation result together with a good construct validity and excellent absolute reliability. Further testing on HCAHPS-Malay version in other settings in Malaysia needs to be done for cross-validation.
AIM: We aimed to test validity and reliability of Malay language translations of GERDQ and QOLRAD in a primary care setting.
METHODS: The questionnaires were first translated into the Malay language (GERDQ-M and QOLRAD-M). Patients from primary care clinics with suspected GERD were recruited to complete GERDQ-M, QOLRAD-M, and Malay-translated 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36 or SF-36-M), and underwent endoscopy and 24-h pH-impedance test.
RESULTS: A total of 104 (mean age 47.1 years, women 51.9%) participants were enrolled. The sensitivity and specificity for GERDQ-M cut-off score ≥8 were 90.2 and 77.4%, respectively. Based on this cut-off score, 54.7% had a high probability of GERD diagnosis. GERD-M score ≥8 vs. < 8 was associated with erosive esophagitis (p < 0.001), hiatus hernia (p = 0.03), greater DeMeester score (p = 0.001), and Zerbib scores for acid refluxes (p < 0.001) but not non-acid refluxes (p = 0.1). Mean total scores of QOLRAD-M and SF-36-M were correlated (r = 0.74, p < 0.001). GERDQ-M ≥8, erosive esophagitis, and DeMeester ≥14.72 were associated with impaired QOLRAD-M in all domains (all p < 0.02) but this was not seen with SF-36.
CONCLUSIONS: GERDQ-M and QOLRAD-M are valid and reliable tools applicable in a primary care setting.
METHODS: The questionnaire was translated into Mandarin. Upon enrollment, caregivers completed the Mandarin PEDS and answered four questions about its acceptability and usefulness, and its ease of understanding and completion. The Mandarin PEDS was independently evaluated by a pediatrician and a community nurse, and classified as high risk (≥two predictive concerns), medium risk (one predictive concern), low risk (any non-predictive concerns) or no risk (if no concern) for developmental delays. The caregivers repeated Mandarin PEDS at a 2 week interval for test-retest reliability, while the children underwent testing for accuracy using a developmental assessment test.
RESULTS: The majority (≥85%) of the 73 caregivers perceived the Mandarin PEDS as acceptable and useful, as well as easy to understand and complete. Fifteen (20.5%) and 24 responses (33.9%) were classified as high and moderate risk, respectively. The test-retest and inter-rater reliabilities were excellent, with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.812 (95% CI: 0.701-0.881, P
Methods: In Phase 1, a multidisciplinary team identified domains for measurement, operationalized impairment levels, and reviewed visual languages for the scale. In Phase 2, feedback was sought from health professionals and the general public. In Phase 3, 366 participants completed preliminary testing on the revised draft, including 162 UK paramedics, and rated the scale on feasibility and usability. In Phase 4, following translation into Malay, the final prototype was tested in 95 participants in Peninsular Malaysia and Borneo.
Results: The final scale incorporated 14 domains, each conceptualized with 3-6 response levels. All domains were rated as "understood well" by most participants (range 64-94%). Percentage agreement with positive statements regarding appearance, feasibility, and usefulness ranged from 66% to 95%. Overall feedback from health-care professionals supported its content validity.
Conclusions: The PFFS is comprehensive, feasible, and appears generalizable across countries, and has face and content validity. Investigation into the reliability and predictive validity of the scale is currently underway.
DESIGN: Patients were assessed for food addiction utilizing the Malay YFAS 2.0. The participants were also assessed for eating disorder using the validated Malay Binge Eating Scale. The psychometric properties of the YFAS 2.0 were determined by analysing factor structure, overall item statistics, internal consistency and construct validity.
SETTING: Between 2017 and 2018, participants were chosen from a regional primary-care clinic in the district of Seremban, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n 382) from a regional primary-care clinic.
RESULTS: The prevalence of food addiction was 5·0%. A two-factor structure of the YFAS was confirmed as the most optimal solution for the scale via confirmatory factor analysis. In both its diagnostic and symptom count version, the YFAS 2.0 had good internal consistency (Kuder-Richardson α > 0·80 and McDonald's ω > 0·9).
CONCLUSIONS: We validated a psychometrically sound Malay version of the YFAS 2.0 in a primary-care population. Both diagnostic and symptom count versions of the scale had robust psychometric properties. The questionnaire can be used to develop health promotion strategies to detect food addiction tendencies in a general population.