阿拉伯版良好死亡量表(GDI-A)问卷对癌症成年患者巴勒斯坦家庭成员的心理测量特性

Hammoda Abu-Odah , Frances Kam Yuet Wong , Juanjuan Zhao , Abdallah Ahmad Alwawi , Ali Alkhatib , Alex Molassiotis
{"title":"阿拉伯版良好死亡量表(GDI-A)问卷对癌症成年患者巴勒斯坦家庭成员的心理测量特性","authors":"Hammoda Abu-Odah ,&nbsp;Frances Kam Yuet Wong ,&nbsp;Juanjuan Zhao ,&nbsp;Abdallah Ahmad Alwawi ,&nbsp;Ali Alkhatib ,&nbsp;Alex Molassiotis","doi":"10.1016/j.ymecc.2023.100001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite the importance of understanding the concept of good death (GD) from different cultural perspectives, it has not been assessed in Arab communities because of the unavailability of validated instruments. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the Good Death Inventory (GDI-A) questionnaire used among Palestinian bereaved family members of cancer patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cross-sectional methodological study was applied. An online survey was adopted as a data collection method. The online survey was delivered through Qualtrics and posted in cancer and health-related social media groups on Facebook, the most commonly utilized social media platform in Palestine. A convenient and snowball sampling of 285 family members of deceased adult cancer patients was adopted. The participants were asked to complete GDI online survey. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), content validity, and internal consistency reliability were assessed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Participants showed a good perspective about death (<em>M</em> = 300.01, <em>SD</em> = 31.09). Significant differences in GDI-A total score were reported with the “patient’s relationship with family” (M = 303.02, SD = 31.42), F(2, 282) = 7.787, <em>p</em> = .001, “educational level” (M = 305.97, SD = 28.38), F(4, 280) = 3.685, p = .006, and “member’s relationship with the patient” (M = 311.74, SD = 16.57), F(5, 279) = 3.125, <em>p</em> = .009. The Arabic version scale-level content validity index and the scale-level content validity index-universal agreement were 0.96 and 0.85, respectively. Factor analysis with a varimax rotation matrix revealed that 16 factors explained 76.08% of the variance.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study provides the literature with an Arabic questionnaire for understanding the concept of a GD from the perspective of bereaved families. The GDI Arabic translated version is a psychometrically robust instrument with satisfactory measurement, which can be used for evaluating a GD among bereaved families.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100896,"journal":{"name":"Measurement and Evaluations in Cancer Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the good death inventory (GDI-A) questionnaire tested on Palestinian family members of deceased adult cancer patients\",\"authors\":\"Hammoda Abu-Odah ,&nbsp;Frances Kam Yuet Wong ,&nbsp;Juanjuan Zhao ,&nbsp;Abdallah Ahmad Alwawi ,&nbsp;Ali Alkhatib ,&nbsp;Alex Molassiotis\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ymecc.2023.100001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite the importance of understanding the concept of good death (GD) from different cultural perspectives, it has not been assessed in Arab communities because of the unavailability of validated instruments. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the Good Death Inventory (GDI-A) questionnaire used among Palestinian bereaved family members of cancer patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cross-sectional methodological study was applied. An online survey was adopted as a data collection method. The online survey was delivered through Qualtrics and posted in cancer and health-related social media groups on Facebook, the most commonly utilized social media platform in Palestine. A convenient and snowball sampling of 285 family members of deceased adult cancer patients was adopted. The participants were asked to complete GDI online survey. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), content validity, and internal consistency reliability were assessed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Participants showed a good perspective about death (<em>M</em> = 300.01, <em>SD</em> = 31.09). Significant differences in GDI-A total score were reported with the “patient’s relationship with family” (M = 303.02, SD = 31.42), F(2, 282) = 7.787, <em>p</em> = .001, “educational level” (M = 305.97, SD = 28.38), F(4, 280) = 3.685, p = .006, and “member’s relationship with the patient” (M = 311.74, SD = 16.57), F(5, 279) = 3.125, <em>p</em> = .009. The Arabic version scale-level content validity index and the scale-level content validity index-universal agreement were 0.96 and 0.85, respectively. Factor analysis with a varimax rotation matrix revealed that 16 factors explained 76.08% of the variance.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study provides the literature with an Arabic questionnaire for understanding the concept of a GD from the perspective of bereaved families. The GDI Arabic translated version is a psychometrically robust instrument with satisfactory measurement, which can be used for evaluating a GD among bereaved families.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Measurement and Evaluations in Cancer Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Measurement and Evaluations in Cancer Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949877523000011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Measurement and Evaluations in Cancer Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949877523000011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景尽管从不同的文化角度理解善终的概念很重要,但由于缺乏有效的工具,阿拉伯社区尚未对其进行评估。本研究旨在评估阿拉伯版在癌症患者巴勒斯坦家属中使用的良好死亡问卷(GDI-A)的心理测量特性。方法采用横断面方法学研究。采用了在线调查作为数据收集方法。这项在线调查通过Qualtrics进行,并发布在巴勒斯坦最常用的社交媒体平台Facebook上的癌症和健康相关社交媒体群中。对285名癌症成年患者的家属进行了方便的滚雪式抽样。参与者被要求完成GDI在线调查。验证性因素分析(CFA)、内容有效性和内部一致性信度被评估。结果参与者对死亡有良好的认识(M=300.01,SD=31.09)。GDI-a总分与“患者与家人的关系”(M=303.02,SD=31.42)、F(2822)=7.787,p=0.001、“文化程度”(M=305.97,SD=28.38)、,以及“成员与患者的关系”(M=311.74,SD=16.57),F(5279)=3.125,p=.009。阿拉伯语版本量表水平内容有效性指数和量表水平属性有效性指数的普遍一致性分别为0.96和0.85。方差最大旋转矩阵的因子分析显示,16个因子解释了76.08%的方差。结论本研究为文献提供了一份阿拉伯语问卷,从丧亲家庭的角度理解GD的概念。GDI阿拉伯语翻译版是一种心理测量学稳健的工具,测量结果令人满意,可用于评估丧亲家庭的GD。
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
Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the good death inventory (GDI-A) questionnaire tested on Palestinian family members of deceased adult cancer patients

Background

Despite the importance of understanding the concept of good death (GD) from different cultural perspectives, it has not been assessed in Arab communities because of the unavailability of validated instruments. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the Good Death Inventory (GDI-A) questionnaire used among Palestinian bereaved family members of cancer patients.

Methods

A cross-sectional methodological study was applied. An online survey was adopted as a data collection method. The online survey was delivered through Qualtrics and posted in cancer and health-related social media groups on Facebook, the most commonly utilized social media platform in Palestine. A convenient and snowball sampling of 285 family members of deceased adult cancer patients was adopted. The participants were asked to complete GDI online survey. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), content validity, and internal consistency reliability were assessed.

Results

Participants showed a good perspective about death (M = 300.01, SD = 31.09). Significant differences in GDI-A total score were reported with the “patient’s relationship with family” (M = 303.02, SD = 31.42), F(2, 282) = 7.787, p = .001, “educational level” (M = 305.97, SD = 28.38), F(4, 280) = 3.685, p = .006, and “member’s relationship with the patient” (M = 311.74, SD = 16.57), F(5, 279) = 3.125, p = .009. The Arabic version scale-level content validity index and the scale-level content validity index-universal agreement were 0.96 and 0.85, respectively. Factor analysis with a varimax rotation matrix revealed that 16 factors explained 76.08% of the variance.

Conclusion

This study provides the literature with an Arabic questionnaire for understanding the concept of a GD from the perspective of bereaved families. The GDI Arabic translated version is a psychometrically robust instrument with satisfactory measurement, which can be used for evaluating a GD among bereaved families.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Patient reported experience measures to assess psychosocial cancer care: A rapid review of current instruments Psychometric properties of the Sexual Attitudes and Beliefs Scale (SABS-C8) for health professionals in cancer care settings Development of a structured questionnaire to assess cancer patients’ individual needs in general practice. A qualitative study The HAIR-QoL measure Part 2: Validation of an instrument to measure of the severity and impact of chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) The HAIR-QoL measure Part 1: What are the quality of life issues for people with cancer with chemotherapy-induced alopecia?
×
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