Cargando…

The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community

BACKGROUND: Subjective cognitive decline‐questionnaire 9 (SCD‐Q9) was developed to detect SCD complaints at risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, our previous findings indicated that its coverage might be insufficient. To test this hypothesis, we recently translated SCD‐Q21. OBJECTIVE: T...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hao, Lixiao, Jia, Jianguo, Xing, Yue, Han, Ying
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9392547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35866228
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2709
_version_ 1784771086773125120
author Hao, Lixiao
Jia, Jianguo
Xing, Yue
Han, Ying
author_facet Hao, Lixiao
Jia, Jianguo
Xing, Yue
Han, Ying
author_sort Hao, Lixiao
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Subjective cognitive decline‐questionnaire 9 (SCD‐Q9) was developed to detect SCD complaints at risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, our previous findings indicated that its coverage might be insufficient. To test this hypothesis, we recently translated SCD‐Q21. OBJECTIVE: To examine the reliability and validity of this translated SCD‐Q21 and to explore its effectiveness for discriminating MCI from controls. METHODS: Item analysis was performed to understand its item discrimination and homogeneity. The Cronbach's α and Spearman‐Brown's split‐half coefficients were calculated to test its reliability. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) value, Bartlett's sphericity test, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were used to examine its construct validity. The content validity was evaluated using five‐grade Likert scale. Finally, the SCD‐Q21 scores in MCI and controls were compared. RESULTS: The difference of each item between the extreme groups was significant. The Cronbach's α coefficient was .913 and Spearman‐Brown's split‐half coefficient was .894. When performing holding one‐out approach, the Cronbach's α coefficient ranged from .906 to .914. The KMO value was .929 and the difference of Bartlett's Sphericity test was significant. All experts scored 5 points when assessing its content. Finally, a significant difference of score was found between MCI and NC groups. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability and validity of the SCD‐Q21 are good, which may pave a way for its application in a wider Chinese‐speaking population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9392547
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93925472022-08-24 The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community Hao, Lixiao Jia, Jianguo Xing, Yue Han, Ying Brain Behav Original Articles BACKGROUND: Subjective cognitive decline‐questionnaire 9 (SCD‐Q9) was developed to detect SCD complaints at risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, our previous findings indicated that its coverage might be insufficient. To test this hypothesis, we recently translated SCD‐Q21. OBJECTIVE: To examine the reliability and validity of this translated SCD‐Q21 and to explore its effectiveness for discriminating MCI from controls. METHODS: Item analysis was performed to understand its item discrimination and homogeneity. The Cronbach's α and Spearman‐Brown's split‐half coefficients were calculated to test its reliability. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) value, Bartlett's sphericity test, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were used to examine its construct validity. The content validity was evaluated using five‐grade Likert scale. Finally, the SCD‐Q21 scores in MCI and controls were compared. RESULTS: The difference of each item between the extreme groups was significant. The Cronbach's α coefficient was .913 and Spearman‐Brown's split‐half coefficient was .894. When performing holding one‐out approach, the Cronbach's α coefficient ranged from .906 to .914. The KMO value was .929 and the difference of Bartlett's Sphericity test was significant. All experts scored 5 points when assessing its content. Finally, a significant difference of score was found between MCI and NC groups. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability and validity of the SCD‐Q21 are good, which may pave a way for its application in a wider Chinese‐speaking population. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-07-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9392547/ /pubmed/35866228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2709 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Hao, Lixiao
Jia, Jianguo
Xing, Yue
Han, Ying
The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community
title The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community
title_full The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community
title_fullStr The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community
title_full_unstemmed The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community
title_short The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community
title_sort reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a chinese community
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9392547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35866228
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2709
work_keys_str_mv AT haolixiao thereliabilityandvaliditytestofsubjectivecognitivedeclinequestionnaire21withpopulationinachinesecommunity
AT jiajianguo thereliabilityandvaliditytestofsubjectivecognitivedeclinequestionnaire21withpopulationinachinesecommunity
AT xingyue thereliabilityandvaliditytestofsubjectivecognitivedeclinequestionnaire21withpopulationinachinesecommunity
AT hanying thereliabilityandvaliditytestofsubjectivecognitivedeclinequestionnaire21withpopulationinachinesecommunity
AT haolixiao reliabilityandvaliditytestofsubjectivecognitivedeclinequestionnaire21withpopulationinachinesecommunity
AT jiajianguo reliabilityandvaliditytestofsubjectivecognitivedeclinequestionnaire21withpopulationinachinesecommunity
AT xingyue reliabilityandvaliditytestofsubjectivecognitivedeclinequestionnaire21withpopulationinachinesecommunity
AT hanying reliabilityandvaliditytestofsubjectivecognitivedeclinequestionnaire21withpopulationinachinesecommunity