引用本文
  • 李宇航,丁洁,潘江其,等.心脏影响否认量表在急性心肌梗死人群中的信度效度检验[J].同济大学学报(医学版),2020,41(5):592-597.    [点击复制]
  • LI Yu-hang,DING Jie,PAN Jiang-qi,et al.Reliability and validity of a Chinese Version of Cardiac Denial of Impact Scale among patients with acute myocardial infarction[J].同济大学学报(医学版),2020,41(5):592-597.   [点击复制]
【打印本页】 【在线阅读全文】【下载PDF全文】 查看/发表评论下载PDF阅读器关闭

←前一篇|后一篇→

过刊浏览    高级检索

本文已被:浏览 24次   下载 21 本文二维码信息
码上扫一扫!
心脏影响否认量表在急性心肌梗死人群中的信度效度检验
李宇航,丁洁,潘江其,王真,屠荣祥,吴珩,马文林
0
(同济大学医学院,上海200092;上海市浦东新区公利医院心血管内科,上海200135;南京市江宁医院全科医学科,南京211100;同济大学附属同济医院心身科,上海200065;同济大学附属同济医院老年科,上海200065)
摘要:
目的在急性心肌梗死(acute myocardial infarction, AMI)患者中,对中文版的心脏影响否认量表(CDIS)进行信度和效度检验。方法在上海市4家医院连续收集AMI患者296例,采用中文版CDIS、多维度健康控制诊断量表(MHLC)、广泛性焦虑量表(GAD-7)和世界卫生组织幸福指数量表(WHO-5)等进行评估。对中文版CDIS的各条目进行项目分析,信度检验包括Cronbach’s α系数和分半信度,效度检验包括探索性因子分析、内部相关性分析和效标效度。结果有效回收问卷260份,CDIS平均得分为24.97分。否认与非否认组患者各条目间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。各条目得分与总分间的相关系数为0.35~0.71(P<0.01)。量表包含3个主要因子,累计方差贡献率为62.22%,各因子与总分间的相关系数为0.62~0.87(P<0.01)。量表的Cronbach’s α系数为0.69,分半信度为0.62。CDIS总分与WHO-5幸福指数(r=0.179,P=0.04)、MHLC中的内控量表(r=0.22,P<0.001)和机遇控量表(r=0.146,P=0.19)得分正相关,与GAD-7得分(r=-0.243,P<0.001)负相关。结论CDIS在AMI患者中具有一定的信度和效度,可用于AMI患者心脏影响否认相关的研究。
关键词:  心脏影响否认量表  急性心肌梗死  信度  效度
DOI:10.16118/j.1008-0392.2020.05.009
投稿时间:2020-01-30
基金项目:上海市科学技术委员会科研计划项目(16411965500)
Reliability and validity of a Chinese Version of Cardiac Denial of Impact Scale among patients with acute myocardial infarction
LI Yu-hang,DING Jie,PAN Jiang-qi,WANG Zhen,TU Rong-xiang,WU Heng,MA Wen-lin
(Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200092, China;Dept. of Cardiology, Shanghai Pudong New Area District Gongli Hospital, Shanghai 200135, China;Dept. of General Medicine, Nanjing Jiangning Hospital, Nanjing 211100, China;Dept. of Psychosomatic, Tongji Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200065, China;Dept. of Geriatrics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200065, China)
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo assess the reliability and validity of a Chinese version of Cardiac Denial of Impact Scale(CDIS) among acute myocardial infarction(AMI) patients. MethodsA total of 296 AMI patients were enrolled from 4 hospitals in Shanghai. The patients were assessed with a Chinese version of CDIS. The psychological control of health, anxiety symptoms and well-being index of patients were assessed with the multidimensional health locus of control scale(MHLC) (including internal health locus of control, IHLC; powerful others health locus of control, PHLC and chance health locus of control, CHLC), generalized anxiety disorder-7(GAD-7) and world health organization well-being index(WHO-5), respectively. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of CDIS were analyzed; the Cronbach’s α coefficient and split-half reliability were used for reliability test; exploratory factor analysis, internal correlation analysis and criterion-related validity were used for validity tests. ResultsA total of 260 valid questionnaires were recovered. The average score of CDIS was 24.97; there were significant differences in the scores of eight items in CDIS between denying and non-denying patients(P<0.05). The correlation coefficient between the scores of each item and the total score was 0.35-0.71, indicating a positive correlation(P<0.01). Cronbach’s α coefficient and split-half reliability of the scale were 0.69 and 0.62 respectively. The Chinese version of CDIS included 3 factors and the load factors was 0.62-0.87 and accumulated variance contribution rate was 62.22%. The total score of CDIS was positively correlated with the WHO-5(r=0.179,P=0.04), IHLC(r=0.22,P<0.001), and CHLC(r=0.146,P=0.19), while was negatively correlated with GAD-7(r=-0.243,P<0.001). ConclusionThe Chinese version of CDIS has acceptable reliability and validity, and is capable for research on population with cardiac denial in China.
Key words:  cardiac denial of impact scale  acute myocardial infarction  reliability  validity

您是第2295905位访问者
版权所有《同济大学学报(医学版)》编辑部
主管单位:教育部 主办单位:同济大学
地  址: 上海四平路1239号 邮编:200092 电话:021-65980705 E-mail: yxxb@tongji.edu.cn
本系统由北京勤云科技发展有限公司设计