Cargando…

Validation Assessment of a Pain Interference Questionnaire among Student Pharmacists

Validation studies of pain interference instruments used among student pharmacists are rare yet essential for understanding their appropriate use and interpretation in pharmacy education and practice. This study conducted validation and reliability assessments of a five-item Pain Interference Scale...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Whaley, Megan, Awad, Nouf Bin, Warholak, Terri, Axon, David Rhys
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8544710/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34698288
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy9040170
_version_ 1784589874414747648
author Whaley, Megan
Awad, Nouf Bin
Warholak, Terri
Axon, David Rhys
author_facet Whaley, Megan
Awad, Nouf Bin
Warholak, Terri
Axon, David Rhys
author_sort Whaley, Megan
collection PubMed
description Validation studies of pain interference instruments used among student pharmacists are rare yet essential for understanding their appropriate use and interpretation in pharmacy education and practice. This study conducted validation and reliability assessments of a five-item Pain Interference Scale previously administered to student pharmacists. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Unidimensionality was measured using: point-biserial measure correlations; percent of raw variance explained by items; difference between expected; variance modeled by items; and Rasch model fit. To assess scale functioning, response frequency distribution, observed average and sample expected logit distribution, Andrich logit distribution, item separation, and item reliability were assessed. Visual examination of the Item-Person Map determined content validity. Items explained 64.2% of data raw variance. The difference between raw variance modeled and observed was 0.6. Point-biserial measure correlations were >0.77. Item mean-square infits were 0.7–1.3 while outfit measures were 0.72–1.16. There were >10 responses per response category, response frequency and Andrich thresholds progressively advanced, and observed average and sample expected logits advanced monotonically, Andrich logits = −2.33–1.69, item separation = 2.61, and item reliability = 0.87. Item probability curves indicated response categories were minimally yet adequately distinct. Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93. The Item-Person Map had a ceiling effect indicating content gaps. In conclusion, the pain interference instrument has acceptable construct validity yet contains content gaps. Additional difficult items should be added to the instrument to better capture pain interference among student pharmacists.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8544710
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85447102021-10-26 Validation Assessment of a Pain Interference Questionnaire among Student Pharmacists Whaley, Megan Awad, Nouf Bin Warholak, Terri Axon, David Rhys Pharmacy (Basel) Article Validation studies of pain interference instruments used among student pharmacists are rare yet essential for understanding their appropriate use and interpretation in pharmacy education and practice. This study conducted validation and reliability assessments of a five-item Pain Interference Scale previously administered to student pharmacists. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Unidimensionality was measured using: point-biserial measure correlations; percent of raw variance explained by items; difference between expected; variance modeled by items; and Rasch model fit. To assess scale functioning, response frequency distribution, observed average and sample expected logit distribution, Andrich logit distribution, item separation, and item reliability were assessed. Visual examination of the Item-Person Map determined content validity. Items explained 64.2% of data raw variance. The difference between raw variance modeled and observed was 0.6. Point-biserial measure correlations were >0.77. Item mean-square infits were 0.7–1.3 while outfit measures were 0.72–1.16. There were >10 responses per response category, response frequency and Andrich thresholds progressively advanced, and observed average and sample expected logits advanced monotonically, Andrich logits = −2.33–1.69, item separation = 2.61, and item reliability = 0.87. Item probability curves indicated response categories were minimally yet adequately distinct. Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93. The Item-Person Map had a ceiling effect indicating content gaps. In conclusion, the pain interference instrument has acceptable construct validity yet contains content gaps. Additional difficult items should be added to the instrument to better capture pain interference among student pharmacists. MDPI 2021-10-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8544710/ /pubmed/34698288 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy9040170 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Whaley, Megan
Awad, Nouf Bin
Warholak, Terri
Axon, David Rhys
Validation Assessment of a Pain Interference Questionnaire among Student Pharmacists
title Validation Assessment of a Pain Interference Questionnaire among Student Pharmacists
title_full Validation Assessment of a Pain Interference Questionnaire among Student Pharmacists
title_fullStr Validation Assessment of a Pain Interference Questionnaire among Student Pharmacists
title_full_unstemmed Validation Assessment of a Pain Interference Questionnaire among Student Pharmacists
title_short Validation Assessment of a Pain Interference Questionnaire among Student Pharmacists
title_sort validation assessment of a pain interference questionnaire among student pharmacists
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8544710/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34698288
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy9040170
work_keys_str_mv AT whaleymegan validationassessmentofapaininterferencequestionnaireamongstudentpharmacists
AT awadnoufbin validationassessmentofapaininterferencequestionnaireamongstudentpharmacists
AT warholakterri validationassessmentofapaininterferencequestionnaireamongstudentpharmacists
AT axondavidrhys validationassessmentofapaininterferencequestionnaireamongstudentpharmacists