《视光学院视力发展生活质量问卷》中文版的重测信效度

Fen Ren
{"title":"《视光学院视力发展生活质量问卷》中文版的重测信效度","authors":"Fen Ren","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1674-845X.2019.10.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: \nTo examine the test-retest reliability and validity of the College of Optometrists in Vision Development Quality of Life questionnaire (COVD-QOL) that had been translated and culturally adapted to the Mandarin Chinese language. \n \n \nMethods: \nIn this cross-section study, the final Chinese version of COVD-QOL was established after translation, back-translation and cognitive interviews based on the Brislin translation model. A sample of 20-23 year-old subjects (118 participants) from Xiamen Medical College completed the Chinese version of COVD-QOL, only 80 subjects were retested after three weeks. All data were analyzed using item analysisi, Cronbach's α coeffcient, retest reliability and so on. \n \n \nResults: \nThe correlation coefficient between each item score and total score ranged from 0.333 to 0.684 (P<0.01). The coefficient of internal consistency (Cronbach's α) was 0.791, the Chinese version of COVD-QOL had good retest reliability with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.750 (P=0.002). The content validity index was 0.985. The construct validity was not good, because six factors were extracted by exploratory factor analysis, which could explain 62.3% of the total variance, but the results cannot be analyzed by professional interpretation. \n \n \nConclusions: \nThe Chinese version of COVD-QOL demonstrates good test-retest reliability and content validity. This questionnaire is an appropriate tool to assess the changes in visual symptoms for these native Chinese language speakers. \n \n \nKey words: \ncollege of optometrists in vision development; quality of life questionnaire; COVD-QOL; reliability; validity","PeriodicalId":10142,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Journal of Optometry & Ophthalmology","volume":"30 1","pages":"783-788"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Test-Retest Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the College of Optometrists in Vision Development Quality of Life Questionnaire\",\"authors\":\"Fen Ren\",\"doi\":\"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1674-845X.2019.10.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: \\nTo examine the test-retest reliability and validity of the College of Optometrists in Vision Development Quality of Life questionnaire (COVD-QOL) that had been translated and culturally adapted to the Mandarin Chinese language. \\n \\n \\nMethods: \\nIn this cross-section study, the final Chinese version of COVD-QOL was established after translation, back-translation and cognitive interviews based on the Brislin translation model. A sample of 20-23 year-old subjects (118 participants) from Xiamen Medical College completed the Chinese version of COVD-QOL, only 80 subjects were retested after three weeks. All data were analyzed using item analysisi, Cronbach's α coeffcient, retest reliability and so on. \\n \\n \\nResults: \\nThe correlation coefficient between each item score and total score ranged from 0.333 to 0.684 (P<0.01). The coefficient of internal consistency (Cronbach's α) was 0.791, the Chinese version of COVD-QOL had good retest reliability with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.750 (P=0.002). The content validity index was 0.985. The construct validity was not good, because six factors were extracted by exploratory factor analysis, which could explain 62.3% of the total variance, but the results cannot be analyzed by professional interpretation. \\n \\n \\nConclusions: \\nThe Chinese version of COVD-QOL demonstrates good test-retest reliability and content validity. This questionnaire is an appropriate tool to assess the changes in visual symptoms for these native Chinese language speakers. \\n \\n \\nKey words: \\ncollege of optometrists in vision development; quality of life questionnaire; COVD-QOL; reliability; validity\",\"PeriodicalId\":10142,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chinese Journal of Optometry & Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"783-788\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chinese Journal of Optometry & Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1674-845X.2019.10.010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Journal of Optometry & Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1674-845X.2019.10.010","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

目的:检验中国验光师学院视力发展生活质量问卷(COVD-QOL)经中文翻译后的重测信度和效度。方法:采用横断面研究方法,基于Brislin翻译模型,经过翻译、反译和认知访谈,建立最终中文版的《COVD-QOL》。厦门医学院20 ~ 23岁的118名受试者完成了中文版的COVD-QOL,仅80名受试者在3周后重新进行了测试。所有资料采用项目分析、Cronbach′s α系数、重测信度等方法进行分析。结果:各项目得分与总分的相关系数为0.333 ~ 0.684 (P<0.01)。内部一致性系数(Cronbach’s α)为0.791,中文版COVD-QOL重测信度良好,Pearson相关系数为0.750 (P=0.002)。内容效度指数为0.985。构念效度不佳,因为探索性因子分析提取了6个因子,可以解释总方差的62.3%,但结果无法进行专业解释分析。结论:中文版《COVD-QOL》具有良好的重测信度和内容效度。本问卷是评估以汉语为母语者视力症状变化的合适工具。关键词:视光学院视力发展;生活质量问卷;COVD-QOL;可靠性;有效性
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
Test-Retest Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the College of Optometrists in Vision Development Quality of Life Questionnaire
Objective: To examine the test-retest reliability and validity of the College of Optometrists in Vision Development Quality of Life questionnaire (COVD-QOL) that had been translated and culturally adapted to the Mandarin Chinese language. Methods: In this cross-section study, the final Chinese version of COVD-QOL was established after translation, back-translation and cognitive interviews based on the Brislin translation model. A sample of 20-23 year-old subjects (118 participants) from Xiamen Medical College completed the Chinese version of COVD-QOL, only 80 subjects were retested after three weeks. All data were analyzed using item analysisi, Cronbach's α coeffcient, retest reliability and so on. Results: The correlation coefficient between each item score and total score ranged from 0.333 to 0.684 (P<0.01). The coefficient of internal consistency (Cronbach's α) was 0.791, the Chinese version of COVD-QOL had good retest reliability with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.750 (P=0.002). The content validity index was 0.985. The construct validity was not good, because six factors were extracted by exploratory factor analysis, which could explain 62.3% of the total variance, but the results cannot be analyzed by professional interpretation. Conclusions: The Chinese version of COVD-QOL demonstrates good test-retest reliability and content validity. This questionnaire is an appropriate tool to assess the changes in visual symptoms for these native Chinese language speakers. Key words: college of optometrists in vision development; quality of life questionnaire; COVD-QOL; reliability; validity
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
The Practice and Effectiveness of COVID-19 RNA Detection in the Prevention and Control of Ophthalmic Hospital Correct Choice of Goggles and Anti-fog Guidance Duringthe Epidemic Period of COVID-19 2019-nCoV and Eye, What We Know and What We Should Do Clinical Application Value of a Preset Marking Line in Lacrimal Endoscopic Surgery Characteristics of Macular Microvascular Changes in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
×
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