Cargando…
Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults
OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to test and compare the reliability and validity, including sensitivity and specificity of the two self-care-related instruments, the Self-care Ability Scale for the Elderly (SASE), and the Appraisal of Self-care Agency Scale-Revised (ASAS-R), among older adults in the Ch...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5549914/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28792975 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182792 |
_version_ | 1783256045682950144 |
---|---|
author | Guo, Lina Söderhamn, Ulrika McCallum, Jacqueline Ding, Xianfei Gao, Han Guo, Qiyun Liu, Kun Liu, Yanjin |
author_facet | Guo, Lina Söderhamn, Ulrika McCallum, Jacqueline Ding, Xianfei Gao, Han Guo, Qiyun Liu, Kun Liu, Yanjin |
author_sort | Guo, Lina |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to test and compare the reliability and validity, including sensitivity and specificity of the two self-care-related instruments, the Self-care Ability Scale for the Elderly (SASE), and the Appraisal of Self-care Agency Scale-Revised (ASAS-R), among older adults in the Chinese context. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used to conduct this study. The sample consisted of 1152 older adults. Data were collected by a questionnaire including the Chinese version of SASE (SASE-CHI), the Chinese version of ASAS-R (ASAS-R-CHI) and the Exercise of Self-Care Agency scale (ESCA). Homogeneity and stability, content, construct and concurrent validity, and sensitivity and specificity were assessed. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha (α) of SASE-CHI was 0.89, the item-to-total correlations ranged from r = 0.15 to r = 0.81, and the test-retest correlation coefficient (intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC) was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.99–1.00; P<0.001). The Cronbach's α of ASAS-R-CHI was 0.78, the item-to-total correlations ranged from r = 0.20 to r = 0.65, and the test-retest ICC was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92–0.96; P<0.001). The content validity index (CVI) of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI was 0.96 and 0.97, respectively. The findings of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) confirmed a good construct validity of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI. The Pearson's rank correlation coefficients, as a measure of concurrent validity, between total score of SASE-CHI and ESCA and ASAS-R-CHI and ESCA were assessed to 0.65 (P<0.001) and 0.62 (P<0.001), respectively. Regarding ESCA as the criterion, the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve for the cut-point of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.91–0.94) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80–0.86), respectively. CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between the two instruments. Each has its own characteristics, but SASE-CHI is more suitable for older adults. The key point is that the users can choose the most appropriate scale according to the specific situation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5549914 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55499142017-08-15 Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults Guo, Lina Söderhamn, Ulrika McCallum, Jacqueline Ding, Xianfei Gao, Han Guo, Qiyun Liu, Kun Liu, Yanjin PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to test and compare the reliability and validity, including sensitivity and specificity of the two self-care-related instruments, the Self-care Ability Scale for the Elderly (SASE), and the Appraisal of Self-care Agency Scale-Revised (ASAS-R), among older adults in the Chinese context. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used to conduct this study. The sample consisted of 1152 older adults. Data were collected by a questionnaire including the Chinese version of SASE (SASE-CHI), the Chinese version of ASAS-R (ASAS-R-CHI) and the Exercise of Self-Care Agency scale (ESCA). Homogeneity and stability, content, construct and concurrent validity, and sensitivity and specificity were assessed. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha (α) of SASE-CHI was 0.89, the item-to-total correlations ranged from r = 0.15 to r = 0.81, and the test-retest correlation coefficient (intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC) was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.99–1.00; P<0.001). The Cronbach's α of ASAS-R-CHI was 0.78, the item-to-total correlations ranged from r = 0.20 to r = 0.65, and the test-retest ICC was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92–0.96; P<0.001). The content validity index (CVI) of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI was 0.96 and 0.97, respectively. The findings of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) confirmed a good construct validity of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI. The Pearson's rank correlation coefficients, as a measure of concurrent validity, between total score of SASE-CHI and ESCA and ASAS-R-CHI and ESCA were assessed to 0.65 (P<0.001) and 0.62 (P<0.001), respectively. Regarding ESCA as the criterion, the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve for the cut-point of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.91–0.94) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80–0.86), respectively. CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between the two instruments. Each has its own characteristics, but SASE-CHI is more suitable for older adults. The key point is that the users can choose the most appropriate scale according to the specific situation. Public Library of Science 2017-08-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5549914/ /pubmed/28792975 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182792 Text en © 2017 Guo et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Guo, Lina Söderhamn, Ulrika McCallum, Jacqueline Ding, Xianfei Gao, Han Guo, Qiyun Liu, Kun Liu, Yanjin Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults |
title | Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults |
title_full | Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults |
title_fullStr | Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults |
title_full_unstemmed | Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults |
title_short | Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults |
title_sort | testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older chinese adults |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5549914/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28792975 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182792 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guolina testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults AT soderhamnulrika testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults AT mccallumjacqueline testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults AT dingxianfei testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults AT gaohan testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults AT guoqiyun testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults AT liukun testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults AT liuyanjin testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults |