首页|心血管疾病风险态度和信念量表的汉化及信效度检验

心血管疾病风险态度和信念量表的汉化及信效度检验

扫码查看
目的 汉化心血管疾病风险态度和信念(ABCD)量表,并进行信效度检验.方法 获取原ABCD量表作者授权后,对量表进行直译、校对、回译、原作者校对,形成初始中文版ABCD量表.2023年1-2月通过微信统一发放、回收问卷,进行两轮专家函询,形成中文版ABCD量表.采用便利抽样法选取2023年6-8月陆军军医大学第一附属医院收治的心血管疾病患者500例,采用中文版ABCD量表、慢性病患者风险感知问卷进行调查.(1)项目分析:采用条目分析法分析中文版ABCD量表各条目评分与其总分的相关性,采用临界比值法根据中文版ABCD量表总分将患者按由高到低的顺序排列,将前25%患者作为高分组(n=117),后25%患者作为低分组(n=117),比较两组中文版ABCD量表各条目评分.(2)信度分析:采用Cronbach'sα系数评价中文版ABCD量表的内部一致性,将中文版ABCD量表条目分为两部分,计算折半信度系数;2周后在调查对象中随机抽取30例患者检测中文版ABCD量表的重测信度.(3)效度分析:邀请5名专家评定中文版ABCD量表的内容效度,包括条目水平内容效度指数(I-CVI)、量表水平内容效度指数(S-CVI);运用探索性因子分析评价中文版ABCD量表的结构效度,采用主成分分析法和最大方差分析进行正交旋转,提取特征根值>1的公因子;采用中文版ABCD量表总分与其各维度得分及慢性病患者风险感知问卷评分的相关系数评价中文版ABCD量表的校标效度.结果 共纳入6名专家,第一轮和第二轮专家函询问卷回收率均为100.00%.第一轮专家函询的专家权威系数为0.819,第二轮专家函询的专家权威系数为0.847,整体专家权威系数为0.833.最终保留22个条目,形成中文版ABCD量表.条目分析法分析结果显示,中文版ABCD量表各条目评分与其总分呈正相关(P<0.05);临界比值法分析结果显示,高分组与低分组中文版ABCD量表各条目评分比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).中文版ABCD量表各维度的Cronbach'sα系数为0.873~0.972,总量表的Cronbach'sα系数为0.912;折半信度系数为0.851,重测信度为0.857(P<0.05),I-CVI为0.725~1.000,S-CVI为0.891.探索性因子分析结果显示,KMO值为0.922,Bartlett's球形检验χ2值为3 517.393(P<0.001),采用主成分分析法和最大方差分析进行正交旋转,共提取4个公因子(疾病知识、风险感知、健康运动意图、健康饮食意图).Pearson相关分析结果显示,中文版ABCD量表总分与疾病知识、风险感知、健康运动意图、健康饮食意图维度得分及慢性病患者风险感知问卷评分均呈正相关(P<0.05).结论 中文版ABCD量表包括疾病知识、风险感知、健康运动意图、健康饮食意图4个维度共22个条目,其具有较好的信效度.
Sinicization of the Attitude and Beliefs about Cardiovascular Disease Risk Questionnaire Scale and Its Reliability and Validity Test
Objective To sinicized the Attitude and Beliefs about Cardiovascular Disease Risk Questionnaire(ABCD)Scale and test its reliability and validity.Methods After obtaining the authorization of the original author of ABCD Scale,initial Chinese version of ABCD Scale was formed by translating,proofreading,retranslating and proofreading by the original author.From January to February 2023,questionnaires were distributed and collected through WeChat,and two rounds of expert letters were made to form the Chinese version of ABCD Scale.Five hundred patients with cardiovascular diseases admitted to First Affiliated Hospital of Army Military Medical University from June to August 2023 were selected by convenient sampling method,and the Chinese version of ABCD Scale and the Risk Perception Questionnaire for Chronic Patients were used for investigation.(1)Item analysis:the correlation between the scores of each item of the Chinese version of ABCD Scale and the total score of the scale was analyzed by item analysis,and according to the total score of the Chinese version of ABCD Scale,the patients were ranked from high to low by critical ratio method,those with the top 25%were as the high score group(n=117)and those with the last 25%were as the low score group(n=117).(2)Reliability analysis:Cronbach's α coefficient was used to evaluate the internal consistency of the Chinese version of ABCD Scale,and the Chinese version of ABCD Scale was divided into two parts to calculate the half-reliability coefficient;two weeks later,30 patients were randomly selected from the survey subjects to test the retest reliability of the Chinese version of ABCD Scale.(3)Validity analysis:five experts were invited to evaluate the content validity of the scale,including item-level content validity index(I-CVI)and scale-level content validity index(S-CVI);exploratory factor analysis was used to evaluate the structural validity of the Chinese version of ABCD Scale,and principal component analysis and maximum variance analysis were used for orthogonal rotation to extract the common factor with characteristic root value>1.Correlation coefficient between the total score of the Chinese version of ABCD Scale and the scores of its each dimension and the Risk Perception Questionnaire for Chronic Patients was used to evaluate the criterion validity of the Chinese version of ABCD Scale.Results Six experts were involved,and the recovery rate of the first and second rounds of expert letters was 100.00%.The expert authority coefficients of the first and second rounds of expert inquiry were 0.819 and 0.847,respectively.The overall expert authority coefficient was 0.833.Finally,22 items were retained to form the Chinese version of ABCD Scale.The results of item analysis showed that the scores of each item in Chinese version of ABCD Scale were positively correlated with the total score of the scale(P<0.05),and the results of critical ratio method showed that there were significant differences in the scores of each item in Chinese version of ABCD Scale between high score group and low score group(P<0.05).Cronbach's α coefficient of each dimension of the Chinese version of ABCD Scale was 0.873-0.972,and Cronbach's α coefficient of the total scale was 0.912.The half reliability coefficient of the scale was 0.851,and the retest reliability of the scale was 0.857(P<0.05).I-CVI of the scale was 0.725-1.000,and S-CVI was 0.891.Exploratory factor analysis showed that KMO value was 0.922,and χ2 value of Bartlett's spherical test was 3 517.393(P<0.001).Principal component analysis and maximum variance analysis were used for orthogonal rotation,and four common factors(disease knowledge,risk perception,healthy exercise intention and healthy eating intention)were extracted.Pearson correlation analysis showed that the total score of Chinese version of ABCD Scale was positively correlated with the scores of disease knowledge,risk perception,healthy exercise intention and healthy eating intention dimensions and the score of Risk Perception Questionnaire for Chronic Patients(P<0.05).Conclusion The Chinese version of ABCD Scale includes 22 items in four dimensions:disease knowledge,risk perception,healthy exercise intention and healthy eating intention.The Chinese version of ABCD Scale has good reliability and validity.

Cardiovascular diseasesRisk evaluation and mitigationReproducibility of eesultsReliabilityValidity

陈怡、景涛、邹新亮、崔海艳、杨晓、王威、江敏

展开 >

400038 重庆市,陆军军医大学第一附属医院心血管内科

心血管疾病 风险评估与减低 结果可重复性 信度 效度

2025

实用心脑肺血管病杂志
河北省心脑肺血管病防治研究办公室

实用心脑肺血管病杂志

影响因子:1.864
ISSN:1008-5971
年,卷(期):2025.33(2)