修改接受性别确认沟通护理的个人的沟通参与项目库(CPIB):认知访谈中的利益相关者反馈

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY Journal of Communication Disorders Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2023.106312
Jeffrey Teixeira , Jingyu Linna Jin , Carolyn Baylor , Michael Nuara
{"title":"修改接受性别确认沟通护理的个人的沟通参与项目库(CPIB):认知访谈中的利益相关者反馈","authors":"Jeffrey Teixeira ,&nbsp;Jingyu Linna Jin ,&nbsp;Carolyn Baylor ,&nbsp;Michael Nuara","doi":"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2023.106312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) is a person-reported outcome measure designed for adults with communication disorders. The CPIB has not been validated for use with clients seeking gender-affirming communication care. The purpose of this study was to determine modifications needed to the CPIB for it to be appropriate for transgender respondents.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Individual qualitative cognitive interviews were conducted with 14 transgender adults (seven assigned male at birth, six assigned female at birth, one intersex / assigned female at birth). As participants completed the CPIB, they were asked to ‘think out loud’ to share their reactions to the items, reasons for their item responses, and any recommendations for changing the CPIB. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify common and salient trends in participants’ feedback.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The most salient change participants required was in the CPIB item stem. The original stem (“Does your condition interfere with….”) is inappropriate for transgender clients because referring to being transgender as a ‘condition’ is unacceptable. A new stem (“How difficult is it for you to ….”) was acceptable to participants. The original CPIB uses the phrase ‘family and friends’ to refer to safe and comfortable communication partners. Participants in this study reported that this does not reflect the experiences of many transgender people who are not accepted by their biological families. The recommended alternate wording is “people who know you well.” The items reflected situations that were relevant to participants, and wording was acceptable with few exceptions. Participants suggested they would have responded to the CPIB items differently earlier in their transition, with their scores improving over time.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The original CPIB questionnaire should not be used with transgender clients due to unacceptable wording. The modified items generated from this study require psychometric calibration for a new CPIB version for clients seeking gender-affirming communication care.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49175,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication Disorders","volume":"102 ","pages":"Article 106312"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modifying the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) for individuals receiving gender-affirming communication care: Stakeholder feedback from cognitive interviews\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey Teixeira ,&nbsp;Jingyu Linna Jin ,&nbsp;Carolyn Baylor ,&nbsp;Michael Nuara\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2023.106312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) is a person-reported outcome measure designed for adults with communication disorders. The CPIB has not been validated for use with clients seeking gender-affirming communication care. The purpose of this study was to determine modifications needed to the CPIB for it to be appropriate for transgender respondents.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Individual qualitative cognitive interviews were conducted with 14 transgender adults (seven assigned male at birth, six assigned female at birth, one intersex / assigned female at birth). As participants completed the CPIB, they were asked to ‘think out loud’ to share their reactions to the items, reasons for their item responses, and any recommendations for changing the CPIB. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify common and salient trends in participants’ feedback.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The most salient change participants required was in the CPIB item stem. The original stem (“Does your condition interfere with….”) is inappropriate for transgender clients because referring to being transgender as a ‘condition’ is unacceptable. A new stem (“How difficult is it for you to ….”) was acceptable to participants. The original CPIB uses the phrase ‘family and friends’ to refer to safe and comfortable communication partners. Participants in this study reported that this does not reflect the experiences of many transgender people who are not accepted by their biological families. The recommended alternate wording is “people who know you well.” The items reflected situations that were relevant to participants, and wording was acceptable with few exceptions. Participants suggested they would have responded to the CPIB items differently earlier in their transition, with their scores improving over time.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The original CPIB questionnaire should not be used with transgender clients due to unacceptable wording. The modified items generated from this study require psychometric calibration for a new CPIB version for clients seeking gender-affirming communication care.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49175,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Communication Disorders\",\"volume\":\"102 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106312\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Communication Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992423000126\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992423000126","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

引言交际参与项目库(CPIB)是一项针对有交际障碍的成年人的个人报告结果测量。CPIB尚未经验证可用于寻求性别确认沟通护理的客户。本研究的目的是确定需要对CPIB进行修改,使其适用于跨性别受访者。方法对14名跨性别成年人(7名出生时为男性,6名出生时女性,1名出生时双性人/女性)进行个体定性认知访谈。当参与者完成CPIB时,他们被要求“大声思考”,分享他们对项目的反应、项目反应的原因以及更改CPIB的任何建议。访谈被记录、转录和分析,以确定参与者反馈的共同和显著趋势。结果参与者要求的最显著的变化是CPIB项目词干。最初的词干(“你的状况会干扰……吗?”)不适合跨性别客户,因为将跨性别称为“状况”是不可接受的。参与者可以接受一个新的词干(“你有多难……”)。最初的CPIB使用短语“家人和朋友”来指代安全舒适的沟通伙伴。这项研究的参与者报告说,这并不能反映出许多变性人的经历,他们的亲生家庭并不接受这些变性人。建议的备选措辞是“熟悉你的人”。这些项目反映了与参与者相关的情况,措辞是可以接受的,只有少数例外。参与者表示,在过渡早期,他们对CPIB项目的反应会有所不同,随着时间的推移,他们的分数会有所提高。结论由于措辞不可接受,CPIB原始问卷不应用于跨性别客户。本研究产生的修改项目需要为寻求性别确认沟通护理的客户进行新CPIB版本的心理测量校准。
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
Modifying the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) for individuals receiving gender-affirming communication care: Stakeholder feedback from cognitive interviews

Introduction

The Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) is a person-reported outcome measure designed for adults with communication disorders. The CPIB has not been validated for use with clients seeking gender-affirming communication care. The purpose of this study was to determine modifications needed to the CPIB for it to be appropriate for transgender respondents.

Methods

Individual qualitative cognitive interviews were conducted with 14 transgender adults (seven assigned male at birth, six assigned female at birth, one intersex / assigned female at birth). As participants completed the CPIB, they were asked to ‘think out loud’ to share their reactions to the items, reasons for their item responses, and any recommendations for changing the CPIB. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify common and salient trends in participants’ feedback.

Results

The most salient change participants required was in the CPIB item stem. The original stem (“Does your condition interfere with….”) is inappropriate for transgender clients because referring to being transgender as a ‘condition’ is unacceptable. A new stem (“How difficult is it for you to ….”) was acceptable to participants. The original CPIB uses the phrase ‘family and friends’ to refer to safe and comfortable communication partners. Participants in this study reported that this does not reflect the experiences of many transgender people who are not accepted by their biological families. The recommended alternate wording is “people who know you well.” The items reflected situations that were relevant to participants, and wording was acceptable with few exceptions. Participants suggested they would have responded to the CPIB items differently earlier in their transition, with their scores improving over time.

Conclusions

The original CPIB questionnaire should not be used with transgender clients due to unacceptable wording. The modified items generated from this study require psychometric calibration for a new CPIB version for clients seeking gender-affirming communication care.

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
Journal of Communication Disorders
Journal of Communication Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
71
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Communication Disorders publishes original articles on topics related to disorders of speech, language and hearing. Authors are encouraged to submit reports of experimental or descriptive investigations (research articles), review articles, tutorials or discussion papers, or letters to the editor ("short communications"). Please note that we do not accept case studies unless they conform to the principles of single-subject experimental design. Special issues are published periodically on timely and clinically relevant topics.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the activation of target words in adults who stutter with and without conscious intention to speak: ERP evidence Dynamic assessment of word learning as a predictor of response to vocabulary intervention Characterizing drug-induced stuttering in electronic health records Parent coaching to target language outcomes for Chinese-learning autistic preschoolers: A preliminary study Editorial Board
×
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