Reliability and validity of the Chinese Version of Apathy Evaluation Scale-Clinician
扫码查看
点击上方二维码区域，可以放大扫码查看
原文链接
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
目的 对淡漠评定量表-医生版(Apathy Evaluation Scale-Clinician,AES-C)进行汉化,并检验其在阿尔茨海默病(Alzheimer's disease,AD)患者中的信效度.方法 遵循Brislin翻译模型,对英文版AES-C量表进行翻译、回译、跨文化调适和预调查,最终形成中文版AES-C.前瞻性收集2022年10月至2024年4月在浙江大学医学院附属邵逸夫医院精神卫生科门诊及住院就诊的55～85岁AD患者的临床资料.招募111例AD患者进行调查,2周后,采用系统抽样方法,从前3例患者中随机选取1例作为起点,随后按照间隔为3和4的顺序依次抽取,直至选出30例.运用临界比值(critical ratio,CR)法对量表进行项目分析,采用计算条目水平的内容效度指数(item-level content validity index,I-CVI)与量表水平的内容效度指数(scale-level content validity index,S-CVI)计算内容效度,采用探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析检验结构效度,通过内部一致性信度(Cronbach's α系数)和重测信度法检验信度.结果 项目分析各条目CR值均＞3.000,P＜0.01.经专家一致讨论内容效度后删除低相关条目,I-CVI和S-CVI均为 1.000.Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin(KMO)值为0.722,Bartlett球形检验x2=621.286(df=55),P＜0.01.共提取4个公因子,方差贡献率为33.0％、15.3％、15.1％、14.9％,累计方差贡献率为78.4％.验证性因子分析显示,卡方自由度比(chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio,x2/df)=1.778、均方根误差近似(root mean square error of approximation,RMSEA)=0.084、Tucker-Lewis 指数(Tucker-Lewis index,TLI)=0.928、拟合优度指数(goodness-of-fit index,GFI)=0.906、比较拟合指数(comparative fit index,CFI)=0.950、增值拟合指数(incremental fit index,IFI)=0.952,该模型所有指标均符合模型拟合标准.Cronbach's α系数为0.809,重测信度系数为0.928.结论 中文版AES-C在AD中具有良好的信度和效度.
Objective To translate and adapt the Apathy Evaluation Scale-Clinician(AES-C)into Chinese and test its reliability and validity in patients with Alzheimer's disease(AD).Methods Following Brislin's translation model,the English version of the AES-C was translated,back-translated,cross-culturally adapted,and pre-surveyed,ultimately forming the Chinese version of the AES-C.Clinical data were prospectively collected from October 2022 to April 2024 for AD patients aged 55-85 years who were treated at the outpatient and inpatient psychiatric departments of Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine.A total of 111 AD patients were recruited.Two weeks later,using systematic sampling,one patient was randomly selected from the first three cases as the starting point,followed by selecting patients at intervals of 3 and 4 alternately until 30 cases were selected.Item analysis of the scale was conducted using the critical ratio(CR)method.Content validity was assessed by calculating the item-level content validity index(I-CVI)and the scale-level content validity index(S-CVI).Structural validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis(EFA)and confirmatory factor analysis(CFA).Reliability was examined by internal consistency reliability(Cronbach's α coefficient)and test-retest reliability.Results The CR values of each item analysis were＞3.000(P＜0.01).Low-relevant entries were deleted after a unanimous expert discussion of content validity,and the I-CVI and S-CVI were both 1.000.The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin(KMO)value was 0.722,Bartlett's test of spherical x2=621.286(df=55),P＜0.01.Four common factors were extracted,with variance contribution rate of 33.0％,15.3％,15.1％,15.1％,and 14.9％,for a cumulative variance contribution of 78.4％.CFA showed x2/df=1.778,Root Mean Square Error of Approximation(RMSEA)=0.084,Tucker-Lewis Index(TLI)=0.928,Goodness-of-Fit Index(GFI)=0.906,Comparative Fit Index(CFI)=0.950,and Incremental Fit Index(IFI)=0.952,and all the indexes of the model were in line with the model fit standards.Cronbach's coefficientα was 0.809,and the retest reliability coefficient was 0.928.Conclusion The Chinese version of the Apathy Evaluation Scale-Clinician(AES-C)demostrates good reliability and validity in AD patients.
Reproducibility of resultsApathyScaleAlzheimer disease
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
