[奈梅亨人工耳蜗植入问卷德语简版的开发]。

IF 0.8 4区 医学 Q4 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY Hno Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-29 DOI:10.1007/s00106-024-01429-8
Viktor Weichbold, Heike Kühn, Franz Muigg
{"title":"[奈梅亨人工耳蜗植入问卷德语简版的开发]。","authors":"Viktor Weichbold, Heike Kühn, Franz Muigg","doi":"10.1007/s00106-024-01429-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) is a questionnaire for assessing hearing-specific quality of life in the context of cochlear implantation. Its length (60 items) makes it difficult to use in clinical practice, so a short version is desirable. The question arises as to which items should be selected for the short version.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The items were selected statistically using uncorrected item-total score correlation. Item selection was made based on datasets from three measurement points: before implantation and 3 and 12 months after processor activation. The items were selected according to the criterion that they were among the 40 items with the highest item-total score correlation at each of the three measurement points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 60 items in the NCIQ, 25 met the criterion and were hence included in the short version. The short version yields similar scores as the long version at the postoperative timepoints; however, at the preoperative timepoint, the agreement of the scores is suboptimal. Split-half reliability and internal homogeneity of the short version are very good.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present study constitutes an initial positive evaluation of a short form of the NCIQ in terms of standard psychometric criteria. Application of the short form is associated with significantly reduced resources in terms of processing and evaluating.</p>","PeriodicalId":55052,"journal":{"name":"Hno","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Development of a German short version of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire].\",\"authors\":\"Viktor Weichbold, Heike Kühn, Franz Muigg\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00106-024-01429-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) is a questionnaire for assessing hearing-specific quality of life in the context of cochlear implantation. Its length (60 items) makes it difficult to use in clinical practice, so a short version is desirable. The question arises as to which items should be selected for the short version.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The items were selected statistically using uncorrected item-total score correlation. Item selection was made based on datasets from three measurement points: before implantation and 3 and 12 months after processor activation. The items were selected according to the criterion that they were among the 40 items with the highest item-total score correlation at each of the three measurement points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 60 items in the NCIQ, 25 met the criterion and were hence included in the short version. The short version yields similar scores as the long version at the postoperative timepoints; however, at the preoperative timepoint, the agreement of the scores is suboptimal. Split-half reliability and internal homogeneity of the short version are very good.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present study constitutes an initial positive evaluation of a short form of the NCIQ in terms of standard psychometric criteria. Application of the short form is associated with significantly reduced resources in terms of processing and evaluating.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hno\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hno\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-024-01429-8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hno","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-024-01429-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:奈梅亨人工耳蜗植入问卷(NCIQ)是一份用于评估人工耳蜗植入后听力生活质量的问卷。它的长度(60 个项目)使其难以在临床实践中使用,因此需要一个简短的版本。问题是应为简短版本选择哪些项目:方法:采用未校正的项目-总分相关性统计方法选择项目。项目选择基于三个测量点的数据集:植入前、处理器激活后 3 个月和 12 个月。选择项目的标准是,在三个测量点中,每个测量点的 40 个项目中,项目-总分相关性最高:结果:NCIQ 的 60 个项目中有 25 个符合标准,因此被纳入简易版。简易版在术后时间点的得分与长版相似;但在术前时间点,得分的一致性不理想。短版的分半信度和内部一致性都非常好:本研究根据标准心理测量学标准对 NCIQ 简本进行了初步的积极评价。使用简表可显著减少处理和评估所需的资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Development of a German short version of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire].

Background: The Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) is a questionnaire for assessing hearing-specific quality of life in the context of cochlear implantation. Its length (60 items) makes it difficult to use in clinical practice, so a short version is desirable. The question arises as to which items should be selected for the short version.

Methods: The items were selected statistically using uncorrected item-total score correlation. Item selection was made based on datasets from three measurement points: before implantation and 3 and 12 months after processor activation. The items were selected according to the criterion that they were among the 40 items with the highest item-total score correlation at each of the three measurement points.

Results: Of the 60 items in the NCIQ, 25 met the criterion and were hence included in the short version. The short version yields similar scores as the long version at the postoperative timepoints; however, at the preoperative timepoint, the agreement of the scores is suboptimal. Split-half reliability and internal homogeneity of the short version are very good.

Conclusion: The present study constitutes an initial positive evaluation of a short form of the NCIQ in terms of standard psychometric criteria. Application of the short form is associated with significantly reduced resources in terms of processing and evaluating.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hno
Hno 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
33.30%
发文量
116
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: HNO is an internationally recognized journal and addresses all ENT specialists in practices and clinics dealing with all aspects of ENT medicine, e.g. prevention, diagnostic methods, complication management, modern therapy strategies and surgical procedures. Review articles provide an overview on selected topics and offer the reader a summary of current findings from all fields of ENT medicine. Freely submitted original papers allow the presentation of important clinical studies and serve the scientific exchange. Case reports feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.
期刊最新文献
[The LittlEARS® Auditory Questionnaire : An analysis of multicentre data of children after early bilateral cochlear implant placement]. [Recurrent syncope : When does the otorhinolaryngologist get involved?] [Pitfalls in the diagnosis of house dust mite allergy]. [Pulsed DPOAEs in serial measurements : Combined analysis paradigm of simultaneously occurring changes in hearing thresholds and DPOAEs. German version]. [Trauma of the midface : Symptoms, diagnostics and treatment].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1