Cargando…

Linguistic validation of the Alberta Context Tool and two measures of research use, for German residential long term care

BACKGROUND: To study the association between organizational context and research utilization in German residential long term care (LTC), we translated three Canadian assessment instruments: the Alberta Context Tool (ACT), Estabrooks’ Kinds of Research Utilization (RU) items and the Conceptual Resear...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hoben, Matthias, Bär, Marion, Mahler, Cornelia, Berger, Sarah, Squires, Janet E, Estabrooks, Carole A, Kruse, Andreas, Behrens, Johann
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3913324/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24479645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-67
_version_ 1782302203337244672
author Hoben, Matthias
Bär, Marion
Mahler, Cornelia
Berger, Sarah
Squires, Janet E
Estabrooks, Carole A
Kruse, Andreas
Behrens, Johann
author_facet Hoben, Matthias
Bär, Marion
Mahler, Cornelia
Berger, Sarah
Squires, Janet E
Estabrooks, Carole A
Kruse, Andreas
Behrens, Johann
author_sort Hoben, Matthias
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To study the association between organizational context and research utilization in German residential long term care (LTC), we translated three Canadian assessment instruments: the Alberta Context Tool (ACT), Estabrooks’ Kinds of Research Utilization (RU) items and the Conceptual Research Utilization Scale. Target groups for the tools were health care aides (HCAs), registered nurses (RNs), allied health professionals (AHPs), clinical specialists and care managers. Through a cognitive debriefing process, we assessed response processes validity–an initial stage of validity, necessary before more advanced validity assessment. METHODS: We included 39 participants (16 HCAs, 5 RNs, 7 AHPs, 5 specialists and 6 managers) from five residential LTC facilities. We created lists of questionnaire items containing problematic items plus items randomly selected from the pool of remaining items. After participants completed the questionnaires, we conducted individual semi-structured cognitive interviews using verbal probing. We asked participants to reflect on their answers for list items in detail. Participants’ answers were compared to concept maps defining the instrument concepts in detail. If at least two participants gave answers not matching concept map definitions, items were revised and re-tested with new target group participants. RESULTS: Cognitive debriefings started with HCAs. Based on the first round, we modified 4 of 58 ACT items, 1 ACT item stem and all 8 items of the RU tools. All items were understood by participants after another two rounds. We included revised HCA ACT items in the questionnaires for the other provider groups. In the RU tools for the other provider groups, we used different wording than the HCA version, as was done in the original English instruments. Only one cognitive debriefing round was needed with each of the other provider groups. CONCLUSION: Cognitive debriefing is essential to detect and respond to problematic instrument items, particularly when translating instruments for heterogeneous, less well educated provider groups such as HCAs. Cognitive debriefing is an important step in research tool development and a vital component of establishing response process validity evidence. Publishing cognitive debriefing results helps researchers to determine potentially critical elements of the translated tools and assists with interpreting scores.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3913324
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39133242014-02-05 Linguistic validation of the Alberta Context Tool and two measures of research use, for German residential long term care Hoben, Matthias Bär, Marion Mahler, Cornelia Berger, Sarah Squires, Janet E Estabrooks, Carole A Kruse, Andreas Behrens, Johann BMC Res Notes Research Article BACKGROUND: To study the association between organizational context and research utilization in German residential long term care (LTC), we translated three Canadian assessment instruments: the Alberta Context Tool (ACT), Estabrooks’ Kinds of Research Utilization (RU) items and the Conceptual Research Utilization Scale. Target groups for the tools were health care aides (HCAs), registered nurses (RNs), allied health professionals (AHPs), clinical specialists and care managers. Through a cognitive debriefing process, we assessed response processes validity–an initial stage of validity, necessary before more advanced validity assessment. METHODS: We included 39 participants (16 HCAs, 5 RNs, 7 AHPs, 5 specialists and 6 managers) from five residential LTC facilities. We created lists of questionnaire items containing problematic items plus items randomly selected from the pool of remaining items. After participants completed the questionnaires, we conducted individual semi-structured cognitive interviews using verbal probing. We asked participants to reflect on their answers for list items in detail. Participants’ answers were compared to concept maps defining the instrument concepts in detail. If at least two participants gave answers not matching concept map definitions, items were revised and re-tested with new target group participants. RESULTS: Cognitive debriefings started with HCAs. Based on the first round, we modified 4 of 58 ACT items, 1 ACT item stem and all 8 items of the RU tools. All items were understood by participants after another two rounds. We included revised HCA ACT items in the questionnaires for the other provider groups. In the RU tools for the other provider groups, we used different wording than the HCA version, as was done in the original English instruments. Only one cognitive debriefing round was needed with each of the other provider groups. CONCLUSION: Cognitive debriefing is essential to detect and respond to problematic instrument items, particularly when translating instruments for heterogeneous, less well educated provider groups such as HCAs. Cognitive debriefing is an important step in research tool development and a vital component of establishing response process validity evidence. Publishing cognitive debriefing results helps researchers to determine potentially critical elements of the translated tools and assists with interpreting scores. BioMed Central 2014-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC3913324/ /pubmed/24479645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-67 Text en Copyright © 2014 Hoben et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hoben, Matthias
Bär, Marion
Mahler, Cornelia
Berger, Sarah
Squires, Janet E
Estabrooks, Carole A
Kruse, Andreas
Behrens, Johann
Linguistic validation of the Alberta Context Tool and two measures of research use, for German residential long term care
title Linguistic validation of the Alberta Context Tool and two measures of research use, for German residential long term care
title_full Linguistic validation of the Alberta Context Tool and two measures of research use, for German residential long term care
title_fullStr Linguistic validation of the Alberta Context Tool and two measures of research use, for German residential long term care
title_full_unstemmed Linguistic validation of the Alberta Context Tool and two measures of research use, for German residential long term care
title_short Linguistic validation of the Alberta Context Tool and two measures of research use, for German residential long term care
title_sort linguistic validation of the alberta context tool and two measures of research use, for german residential long term care
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3913324/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24479645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-67
work_keys_str_mv AT hobenmatthias linguisticvalidationofthealbertacontexttoolandtwomeasuresofresearchuseforgermanresidentiallongtermcare
AT barmarion linguisticvalidationofthealbertacontexttoolandtwomeasuresofresearchuseforgermanresidentiallongtermcare
AT mahlercornelia linguisticvalidationofthealbertacontexttoolandtwomeasuresofresearchuseforgermanresidentiallongtermcare
AT bergersarah linguisticvalidationofthealbertacontexttoolandtwomeasuresofresearchuseforgermanresidentiallongtermcare
AT squiresjanete linguisticvalidationofthealbertacontexttoolandtwomeasuresofresearchuseforgermanresidentiallongtermcare
AT estabrookscarolea linguisticvalidationofthealbertacontexttoolandtwomeasuresofresearchuseforgermanresidentiallongtermcare
AT kruseandreas linguisticvalidationofthealbertacontexttoolandtwomeasuresofresearchuseforgermanresidentiallongtermcare
AT behrensjohann linguisticvalidationofthealbertacontexttoolandtwomeasuresofresearchuseforgermanresidentiallongtermcare