Development, Validity and Reliability of the 4-point Likert Turkish version of Cognitive Failures Questionnaire

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
HALE ESER ◽  
MERVE İNAN ◽  
MEHMET KUCUKER ◽  
CAN KILÇIKSIZ ◽  
SEZEN YILMAZ ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Turkish Version ◽  
Cognitive Failures ◽  
Cognitive Failures Questionnaire

FACT-2 – The Frankfurt Adaptive Concentration Test

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Goldhammer ◽  
Helfried Moosbrugger ◽  
Sabine A. Krawietz
Keyword(s):  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Measurement Models ◽  
Cognitive Failures ◽  
Concentration Test ◽  
Cognitive Failures Questionnaire

The Frankfurt Adaptive Concentration Test (FACT-2) requires discrimination between geometric target and nontarget items as quickly and accurately as possible. Three forms of the FACT-2 were constructed, namely FACT-I, FACT-S, and FACT-SR. The aim of the present study was to investigate the convergent validity of the FACT-SR with self-reported cognitive failures. The FACT-SR and the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) were completed by 191 participants. The measurement models confirmed the concentration performance, concentration accuracy, and concentration homogeneity dimensions of FACT-SR. The four dimensions of the CFQ (i.e., memory, distractibility, blunders, and names) were not confirmed. The results showed moderate convergent validity of concentration performance, concentration accuracy, and concentration homogeneity with two CFQ dimensions, namely memory and distractibility/blunders.

Cognitive Failures Questionnaire

1982 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. E. Broadbent ◽  
P. F. Cooper ◽  
P. FitzGerald ◽  
K. R. Parkes
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Failures ◽  
Cognitive Failures Questionnaire

Turkish Adaptation of Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale–Short Form

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
İsmail Toygar ◽  
Sadık Hançerlioğlu ◽  
Selden Gül ◽  
Tülün Utku ◽  
Ilgın Yıldırım Şimşir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Content Validity ◽  
Short Form ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Turkish Version ◽  
Patient Identification ◽  
Validity Index ◽  
Content Validity Index

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Diabetic Foot Scale–Short Form (DFS-SF). The study was cross-sectional and conducted between January and October 2019 in a diabetic foot council of a university hospital. A total of 194 diabetic foot patients participated in the study. A Patient Identification Form and DFS-SF were used for data collection. Forward and backward translations were used in language validity. Expert opinions were obtained to determine the Content Validity Index. To determine construct validity, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used. Cronbach’s α internal consistency coefficient, item-scale correlation, and test-retest reliability were used to evaluate reliability. It was found that Content Validity Index was 0.97 (0.86-1.00), the factor loading of scale varied from 0.378 to 0.982, Cronbach’s α value varied from 0.81 to 0.94, and item-total correlations were between 0.30 and 0.75. The Turkish version of the DFS-SF was found valid and reliable to measure the quality of life of diabetic foot patients.

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Patient Dignity Inventory

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Yasemin Eskigülek ◽  
Sultan Kav
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Turkish Version ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Fit Index ◽  
Turkish Society

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of the Patient Dignity Inventory (PDI) in the Turkish society, which was developed to evaluate dignity-related distress in palliative care patients. Methods One hundred and twenty-seven adults with advanced cancer hospitalized in several clinics of two university hospitals were included in the study. The patients whose Palliative Performance Scale score was at least 40% were recruited to study. The data were collected with a patient demographic form, the Turkish version of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-TR), and the Turkish version of the PDI (PDI-TR). The PDI-TR was finalized and back-translated after translating into Turkish and obtaining 10 expert opinions. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency, concurrent validity, and test–retest reliability analysis were performed. Results The Cronbach's α coefficient of PDI-TR was 0.94. Factor analysis resulted in a five-factor solution, and all items were loaded on factors. Factors were labeled as symptom distress, existential distress, self-confidence, dependency, and supportive care needs and accounted for 68.70% of the overall variance. The model's normed fit index, comparative fit index, and X2/SD were found between acceptable range (0.90, 0.93, and 2.64, respectively). A positive and strong correlation was found between subdimension scores of HADS-TR and the total score of PDI-TR (r = 0.70 for anxiety subdimension; r = 0.73 for depression subdimension). The test–retest reliability was conducted with 32 patients within the sample two weeks after the first application, and no significant difference was found between the two application scores as the result of paired-sample t-test (p > 0.05). An intraclass correlation coefficient of test–retest reliability was r = 0.855. Significance of results PDI-TR was found to be a valid and reliable tool in palliative care patients in Turkish society.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document