METHODS: The norm-referenced method of standard setting was applied to the real scores of 40 final-year dental students on a multiple-choice question (MCQ), a short answer question (SAQ), and an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). A panel of 10 judges set the standard using the modified-Angoff method for the same paper in one sitting. One judge set the passing score of 10 OSCE questions after 2 weeks. A comparison of the grades and pass/fail rates derived from the absolute standard, norm-referenced, and modified-Angoff methods was made. The intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities of the modified-Angoff method were assessed.
RESULTS: The passing rate for the absolute standard was 100% (40/40), for the norm-referenced method it was 62.5% (25/40), and for the modified-Angoff method it was 80% (32/40). The modified-Angoff method had good inter-rater reliability of 0.876 and excellent test-retest reliability of 0.941.
CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in the outcomes of these three standard-setting methods, as shown by the difference in the proportion of candidates who passed and failed the assessment. The modified-Angoff method was found to have good reliability for use with a professional qualifying dental examination.
METHODS: The HomeSat subscale of the Dutch SASC-19 questionnaire (11 items) underwent back-to-back translation to produce a Malay language version. Content validation was done by Family Medicine Specialists involved in community post-stroke care. Community social support services in the original questionnaire were substituted with equivalent local services to ensure contextual relevance. Internal consistency reliability was determined using Cronbach alpha. Exploratory factor analysis was done to validate the factor structure of the Malay version of the questionnaire (SASC10-My™). The SASC10-My™ was then tested on 175 post-stroke patients who were recruited at ten public primary care healthcentres across Peninsular Malaysia, in a trial-within a trial study.
RESULTS: One item from the original Dutch SASC19 (HomeSat) was dropped. Internal consistency for remaining 10 items was high (Cronbach alpha 0.830). Exploratory factor analysis showed the SASC10-My™ had 2 factors: discharge transition and social support services after discharge. The mean total score for SASC10-My™ was 10.74 (SD 7.33). Overall, only 18.2% were satisfied with outpatient stroke care services (SASC10-My™ score ≥ 20). Detailed analysis revealed only 10.9% of respondents were satisfied with discharge transition services, while only 40.9% were satisfied with support services after discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: The SASC10-My™ questionnaire is a reliable and valid tool to measure caregiver or patient satisfaction with outpatient stroke care services in the Malaysian healthcare setting. Studies linking discharge protocol patterns and satisfaction with outpatient stroke care services should be conducted to improve care delivery and longer-term outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: No.: ACTRN12616001322426 (Registration Date: 21st September 2016.
METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional two-phase study was carried out to develop the scale. In phase 1, a preliminary parent-report measure questionnaire was developed in Bahasa Malaysia. Later, it was sent to four experts for content validity followed by face validity. In Phase 2, a total of 386 parents of pre-school children aged 4 to 6 years old, split into two samples, were involved in the field study for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
RESULT: Sample 1 was used to perform EFA to determine the factorial structure of the SDS. All items with a factor loading of >0.4 were included. Sample 2 was used to perform the CFA. RMSEA and CFI analysis showed that the SDS has a good fit and confirms the dimensional structure found via EFA. The final questionnaire consists of 15 items with a 4 factors' structure and has excellent internal consistency reliability.
CONCLUSIONS: The Screen Dependency Scale (SDS) is a reliable and valid questionnaire to detect screen dependency among pre-school children aged 4 to 6 years old in Malaysia.
Methods: A pool of items was generated from a qualitative study, literature reviews, and expert reviews. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the original 40 items of the E-CIS and followed by 27 items for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A total of 470 elderly people with chronic constipation were involved.
Results: The mean age of the participants was 68.64 ± 6.57. Finally, only 22 items were indicated as appropriately representing the E-CIS, which were grouped into seven subscales: 'daily activities', 'treatment satisfaction', 'lack of control of bodily function', 'diet restriction', 'symptom intensity', 'anxiety' and 'preventive actions'. The scale was confirmed as valid (root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.04, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.961, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.952 and chi-square/degree of freedom (chiSq/df) = 1.44) and reliable (Cronbach's alpha: 0.66-0.85, composite reliability (CR) = 0.699-0.851) to assess the impact of chronic constipation on the elderly's QoL.
Conclusions: The E-CIS is useful to measure the impact of chronic constipation on the elderly's QoL. A further test is needed to determine the validity and reliability of this scale in other elderly population.