scholarly journals Development and validation of the Therapy Preference Scale to understand patients´ systemic cancer treatment preferences

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vijaya Raj Bhatt ◽  
Prajwal Dhakal ◽  
Christopher S Wichman ◽  
Bunny Pozehl
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Content Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Treatment Preferences ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Preference Scale ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Final Questionnaire ◽  
Development And Validation

We incorporated questions related to safety, effectiveness and other characteristics of systemic cancer treatment into a self-report questionnaire – the Therapy Preference Scale – that captures patients´ preferences. The authors asked 20 experts to assess content validity and an additional 20 experts, patients and community members to examine face validity and guide revisions. Key revisions included shortening the length, clarifying constructs and providing details to explain the context and trade-offs necessary to balance the risks and benefits of cancer treatment. The content validity index for the final questionnaire was 1.0, indicating that all questions were relevant. Reviewers expressed that the questionnaire would serve an important purpose. Experts, patients and community members guided revisions of the questionnaire and documented its value.

Therapy preference scale: A novel questionnaire to understand patients’ preferences of cancer treatment.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23179-e23179
Author(s):  
Vijaya Raj Bhatt ◽  
Prajwal Dhakal ◽  
Christopher S Wichman ◽  
Bunny J Pozehl
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Content Validity ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Essential Question ◽  
Key Aspects

e23179 Background: Engaging patients in shared decision-making can help select an appropriate treatment for an individual and enhance patients’ experience and satisfaction with their care. This requires an in-depth understanding of patients’ values and preferences of various aspects of cancer treatment. A questionnaire to assess patient preferences is currently lacking. The purpose of our study was to develop a questionnaire that would fill this gap. Methods: We reviewed published literature to develop a theoretical framework to explain how cancer patients chose a specific therapy for themselves, and to identify key aspects of treatment that determine patients’ decisions about treatment. Three key domains (efficacy, safety and other characteristics of treatment such as need for hospital stay) were identified (Bhatt VR, J Geriatr Oncol. 2018 Nov 27 [Epub ahead of print]) and a mutli-dimensional self-report questionnaire with 49 items was developed. Each item was rated for relevance by 10 experts (oncologists, oncology nurses, advanced practice providers, social workers and pharmacists) to assess content validity (Lawshe formula) (Meas Eval Couns Dev, 47: 79–86). Ratings of ‘very relevant’ or ‘relevant’ were used to identify an essential question. Experts also suggested refinement of items. Three community members and 9 patients evaluated the instrument for face validity. Results: A content validity index for the questionnaire was 0.82. Face validity was confirmed. Based on input from the various stakeholders, the number of items, content, and format of the questionnaire was revised. The revised questionnaire includes a total of 36 items under four sections: safety (14 items), efficacy (4 items), treatment characteristics (8 items) and global items (10 items). Conclusions: We have developed a novel tool and established content and face validity. This self-report questionnaire can be used to understand patients’ preferences of cancer treatment. Further psychometric studies are planned to evaluate reliability and validity. Our ultimate goal is to use this tool to enhance communication between physicians and patients and facilitate shared decision-making.

Development and Validity of Questionnaire for Healthy Adult Human Participants of Early Phase Bioequivalence Pharmacokinetic Endpoint Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 111-117
Author(s):  
Sharad Desai ◽  
Nilesh Patel
Keyword(s):  
Content Validity ◽  
Early Phase ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Healthy Adult ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Domain Identification ◽  
Adult Human ◽  
Human Participants ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Validation Of Questionnaire

Participation of humans in clinical research is always remained questionable. Hence evaluation of such doubt helps to conclude the perception about such participation. This research presents the process for development and validation of questionnaire for Healthy Adult Human Participants of Early Phase Bioequivalence Pharmacokinetic Endpoint Study. For development of questionnaire, literature search, experts’ discussion and authors’ experience was used for domain identification and its segregation for different variables. For validity of questionnaire, face validity and content validity was performed. Modification was done based on response from experts during non-quantitative face validity. % of overall agreement was 94.55 for question asked in face validity. While, Content Validity Ratio and Content Validity Index was calculated using the process mentioned by Lawshe and Lynn respectively. Initially 83 items were identified but based on validation 84 items were finalized after removal of three and addition of four questions. Deleted three items had Content Validity Ratio of 0.00, 0.67 and 0.67 and which were below accepted level of 0.99. While, I-CVI was observed from range of 0.83 to 1.00 and S-CVI values were above acceptable level of 0.90 for S-CVI (S-CVI/ Ave) and 0.80 for S-CVI (S-CVI/UA) for whole questionnaire and each part.

Development and Initial Validation of a Scale Assessing Suicide-Specific Rumination: The Suicide Rumination Scale

Assessment ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 107319112110338
Author(s):  
Megan L. Rogers ◽  
Keyne C. Law ◽  
Claire Houtsma ◽  
Raymond P. Tucker ◽  
Michael D. Anestis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
Item Pool ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Independent Measurement ◽  
Suicidal Thoughts ◽  
Initial Validation ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Report Measure

Suicide-specific rumination, a repetitive mental fixation on one’s suicidal thoughts and intentions, may influence the transition from suicidal thoughts to behaviors. Research on suicide-specific rumination has been hindered by the lack of an independent measurement tool. This article presents the development and validation of a self-report measure of suicide-specific rumination across several samples with lifetime suicidal ideation (Sample 1: N = 494 students; Sample 2: N = 219 community members; Sample 3: N = 128 adults at high risk for suicide). The Suicide Rumination Scale (SRS) item pool was reduced from a pool of 41 items to 8 items that are highly discriminant and of varying levels of difficulty. The SRS demonstrated measurement invariance, convergent validity, and nonredundancy with related measures. Importantly, the SRS differentiated suicide attempters from ideators, suggesting its potential clinical relevance. Overall, these findings suggest that the SRS is a valid and incrementally useful measure of suicide-specific rumination.

Development and Validation of Questionnaire Measuring Registered Nurses' Competencies, Beliefs, Facilitators, Barriers, and Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP-CBFRI)

2021 ◽  
pp. JNM-D-20-00085
Author(s):  
Mohammad H. Abuadas ◽  
Zainab F. Albikawi ◽  
Foud Abuadas
Keyword(s):  
Registered Nurses ◽  
Content Validity ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Final Questionnaire ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Evidence Based Nursing ◽  
Validation Of Questionnaire

BackgroundConsideration needs to be given to a variety of factors that influence the implementation of evidence-based nursing practice (EBNP).AimThis study aimed to develop and validate a questionnaire that measures registered nurses' competencies, beliefs, facilitators, barriers, and implementation of EBNP.MethodsMethodological cross-sectional study in which 612 registered nurses were selected by convenient sampling. A panel of six experts evaluated the content validity of the first draft of the EBPCBFRI questionnaire. The final questionnaire was made up of 55 items. Reliability was determined by means of internal consistency. Construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity was assessed.ResultsThe questionnaire has proven acceptable reliability and validity when used with registered nurses. The scale-level content validity index was .92. Cronbach's α coefficient for the total questionnaire was .87. Exploratory factor analysis supported five significant factors that explained 64.8% of the variance.

scholarly journals Development and validation of the disease - specific problems questionnaire for patients with multiple sclerosis

BMC Neurology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Dehghani
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Physical Problems ◽  
Third Phase ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Final Questionnaire ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Disease Specific

Abstract Background Patients with multiple sclerosis face numerous problems during their lifetime. A self-report measurement of disease - specific problems is required to be developed for patients with multiple sclerosis based on different cultural factors. Accordingly, this can advance our understanding on the disease-specific problems for care planning as well as improving coping ways and quality of life. This study aimed to develop and validate the scale of disease-specific problems of Multiple Sclerosis. Methods This was an exploratory sequential mixed method study conducted in three phases. Correspondingly, in the first phase, the concept of disease-specific problems was defined using the content analysis approach in patients with MS. In the second phase, the item pool was generated from the findings of the first phase, and in the third phase, psychometric properties of the scale, including face, content, and construct validity and reliability, were evaluated. Results After examining both validity and reliability, 28 items were developed in the final questionnaire. As well, by performing the factor analysis, five factors were revealed as follows: physical problems, psychological problems, emotional problems, family problems, and socio-economic problems. Internal consistency and stability of the questionnaire were calculated as 0.82 and 0.90, respectively, indicating an excellent reliability. Conclusion The 28-item questionnaire is valid and reliable for measurement of level of disease - specific problems in Iranian people with MS.

scholarly journals Primary-care patients' trade-off preferences with regard to antidepressants

2014 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. 2301-2308 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Wouters ◽  
L. Van Dijk ◽  
E. C. G. Van Geffen ◽  
H. Gardarsdottir ◽  
A. M. Stiggelbout ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Relapse Prevention ◽  
Symptom Relief ◽  
Additional Treatment ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Treatment Preferences ◽  
Pharmacy Refill ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Primary Care Patients ◽  
Adaptive Conjoint Analysis

BackgroundAntidepressants are frequently prescribed but results regarding their efficacy have been equivocal for different spectra of the severity continuum and their side-effects are often burdensome. Non-adherence is a likely consequence. The objective was therefore to examine patients’ trade-offs between the efficacy, side-effects and other drawbacks of antidepressants and whether these trade-offs predicted non-adherence.MethodTrade-offs from 225 antidepressant users, recruited through community pharmacies, were assessed with an Adaptive Conjoint Analysis (ACA) choice task that was customized to each individual patient. From the estimated utilities, relative importance scores of treatment properties were calculated. Non-adherence was measured through self-report and pharmacy refill data.ResultsRelapse prevention and symptom relief were on average equally important. Side-effects were as important and the side-effect stomach and intestine complaints was on average even slightly more important than relapse prevention and symptom relief. Additional treatment with psychotherapy was preferred by 61% of the patients. A benefit/drawback ratio revealed that 18% of the patients did not consider the efficacy to outweigh the drawbacks. A higher benefit/drawback ratio was associated with a decreased odds of intentional non-adherence [odds ratio (OR) 0.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07–0.7, Wald = 6.7, p = 0.01).ConclusionsFor nearly one in five patients, the efficacy of antidepressants does not outweigh their drawbacks. Knowing patients’ trade-offs is likely to aid both physicians and patients to identify important treatment preferences, to improve adherence and to make more deliberate decisions on whether or not to continue treatment.

Health Problems Questionnaire in Multiple Sclerosis Patients: Development and Validation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Dehghani
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Final Questionnaire ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis Patients ◽  
Development And Validation

Abstract Background Multiple sclerosis patients are faced with numerous problems during their illness. Development of a self-report measure of health problems in multiple sclerosis patients is required based on cultural factors, `which can advance our understanding of the level of health problems for care planning and improvement of coping and quality of life. The current study aimed to develop and validate the scale of health problems of Multiple Sclerosis. Methods This present study is an exploratory sequential mixed method study that was conducted in three phases. In the first phase, the concept of health problems in MS patients was defined using the content analysis approach. In the second phase, the item pool was generated from findings of the first phase. In the third phase, psychometric properties of the scale were evaluated including face, content and construct validity as well as reliability. Results After examining the psychometric properties of validity and reliability, 33 items were designed in the final questionnaire. Factor analyses revealed five factors: physical problems, psychological problems, emotional problems, family problems, and socio-economic problems. Internal consistency and stability of the developed questionnaire confirmed with 0.93 and 0.95 respectively that indicated excellent reliability. Conclusion The 33-item developed questionnaire is valid and reliable for measurement of levels of health problems in Iranian people with MS.

scholarly journals DOP68 Assessment of patients’ understanding of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD): Development and validation of a questionnaire (U-IBDQ)

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S102-S103
Author(s):  
G Ostromohov ◽  
M Fiebelman ◽  
A Hirsch ◽  
Y Ron ◽  
N Aviv Cohen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Content Validity ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Academic Education ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Good Reliability ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel ◽  
Disease Understanding

Abstract Background Education of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients regarding their disease, therapeutic aims and options, is important for patients’ empowerment and commitment to disease management. Currently, there is no standardized and validated tool for assessment patients’ knowledge of their disease. Therefore, we aimed to develop a questionnaire to evaluate IBD patients’ understanding of disease pathophysiology and treatment. Methods We have developed the Understanding IBD Questionnaires (U-IBDQ), consisting of multiple-choice questions in two version [for Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)]. U-The U-IBDQ is composed of 36 questions covering 8 IBD topics. Each question received a similar weight, and total score ranges between 0–100. Questionnaires were tested for: content validity by an independent multidisciplinary stirring committee using the content validity index, face validity, readability and responsiveness on a pilot group of IBD patients. Convergent validity was assessed by correlating scores of the U-IBDQ with physician’s subjective assessment of disease understanding and knowledge. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparison to healthy controls (HC), patients with chronic gastrointestinal (GI) conditions other than IBD, and to GI nurses. A test-retest reliability was assessed among a sub-population of IBD patients which were asked to fill-in the U-IBDQ twice. Multivariate analysis was used to determine associated factors of a high level of disease understanding. Results Study population consisted of IBD patients (n=106), HC (n=35), chronic GI disease patients (n=38) and GI nurses (n=19). Mean U-IBDQ score among IBD patients was 56.5±21.9, not differing between CD and UC patients (P=0.941). There was a strong correlation between the U-IBDQ score and the physician’s subjective score (r=0.747, P<0.001). The U-IBDQ showed strong discriminant validity with mean score of IBD patients significantly higher than that of HC and chronic GI disease patients, and was lower than that of GI nurses (P<0.001). The U-IBDQ is reliable as determined by Cronbach’s alpha = 0.872. Independent factors associated with high U-IBDQ scores included academic education (OR=1.21, 95% CI 1.10–1.33, P<0.001), biologic therapy experience (OR=1.24, 95% CI 1.01–1.53, P=0.046), and IBD diagnosis before the age of 21 years (OR=2.97, 95% CI 1.05–8.87, P=0.050). Conclusion We have developed and meticulously validated the U-IBDQ. This is a short, self-report questionnaire that has demonstrated good reliability and validity in measuring understanding of disease pathophysiology and treatment in IBD.

scholarly journals Development and Validation of a Questionnaire to Measure Association Factors with Suicide

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliano Flávio Rubatino Rodrigues ◽  
Spencer Payão ◽  
Hannes Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analysis ◽  
Content Validity ◽  
Principal Factor ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
The Face ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Suicide Behaviors

Objective: Our goal is to develop an online questionnaire to survey the prevalence of suicidal behavior. Methods: We developed a questionnaire with 51 variables and proceeded with validations. Validations were performed using face validity, content validity, and construct validity. Reliability was performed by test-rest. Results: The face validity was 1.0 and the content validity was 0.91. The exploratory factor analysis got KMO = 0.86 and extracted one principal factor. The confirmatory factor analysis demonstrates RMSEA= 0.000 and CFI=1.000. The test-retest had an intraclass correlated coefficient of 0.98. Conclusion: The adequate development questionnaire was validated, and we have an instrument to survey suicide behaviors in the pandemic time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document