中风知识评估工具(SKAT)：开发、可靠性和有效性

Reuben Grech¹, Paulann Grech²
1、马耳他 Mater Dei 医院医学影像科
2、马耳他大学健康科学学院心理健康系

摘要

该研究的目的是开发和测试基于混合方法和中风相关文献综合的中风知识评估工具的心理测量特性。该 工具的内容主要是根据一项定性研究的结果开发的，该研究涉及 10 名在过去 2 年中因中风入住州立医院的中风患者。 工具构建的另一个来源是广泛的文献综述中出现的信息。由此产生的在线问卷分为三个主要部分，即 i)人口统计、ii) 中风知识和 iii)中风反应。选择 5 点李克特量表来回答 B 和 C 部分中的每个问题，这有助于使用描述性和推理统计的 分析过程。该工具经过了心理测试，结果令人鼓舞。使用标准工具，例如本文介绍的 SKAT，为处于评估医疗保健教育 需求的主要位置的卫生专业人员提供了评估卒中知识并在两者之间进行有趣的统一比较的方法。不同的地理和种族人 口。使用此工具的目标受众是 a)一般人群和/或 b)正在计划提高中风知识的人群。然后，SKAT 可以告知教育和意识 需求。

关键词

中风知识；评估工具；中风；仪器开发；中风意识

参考

[1] Billings-Gagliardi, S., & Mazor, K. M. (2005). Development and validation of the stroke action test. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation, 36(5), 1035–1039.

[2] Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

[3] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). Use of a registry to improve acute stroke care -seven states, 2005-2009. MMWR -Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 60(7), 206-210.

[4] Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284-290.

[5] Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.

[6] DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale development: theory and applications. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.

[7] Fitzpatrick, R., Davey, C., Buxton, M., & Jones, D. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment, 2(14), 1-74.

[8] Grech, P., & Grech, R. (2021). Stroke knowledge: Developing a framework for data integration in a sequential exploratory mixed-method study. Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences 2 (2), 68-81.

[9] Haladyna, T. M. (2004). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items (3rd ed. ed.): Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[10] Haynes, S., Richard, D., & Kubany, E. (1995). Content Validity in Psychological Assessment: A Functional Approach to Concepts and Methods(Vol. 7).

[11] Hou, W.-H., Hoffmann, T., Huang, Y.-J., Wu, T.-Y., Chen, S.-S., & Hsieh, C.-L. (2017). A systematic review of tests assessing stroke knowledge. Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 32(3), 271-280. [12] Inzitari, D., Eliasziw, M., Gates, P., Sharpe, B. L., Chan, R. K. T., Meldrum, H. E., & Barnett, H. J. M. (2000). The causes and risk of stroke in patients with asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis. The New England Journal of Medicine, 342(23), 1693-1701.

[13] Jordan, J. E., Osborne, R. H., & Buchbinder, R. (2011). Critical appraisal of health literacy indices revealed variable underlying constructs, narrow content, and psychometric weaknesses (Vol. 64, pp. 366-379). Elmsford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

[14] Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264-269.

[15] Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., de Vet, H. C. W. (2010). The COSMIN study reached an international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(7), 737-745.

[16] O’Mahony, P., Rodgers, H., Thomson, R., Dobson, R., & James, O. (1997). Satisfaction with information and advice received by stroke patients. Clinical Rehabilitation,11(1), 68-72.

[17] Parahoo, K. (2014). Nursing research: principles, process, and issues (Third ed.). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

[18] Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2010). Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: Myths and strategies. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(11), 1451-1458.

[19] Sudlow, C. L. M., & Warlow, C. P. (1996). Comparing stroke incidence worldwide. What makes studies comparable? Stroke, 27, 550-558.

[20] Sullivan, K., & Dunton, N. (2004). Development and validation of the stroke knowledge test. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 11(3), 19-28.

[21] Tay, L., & Jebb, A. T. (2017). The SAGE encyclopedia of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed.). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: SAGE.

[22] Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 45-55.

[23] Trochim, W. M. K. (2001). Research Methods Knowledge Base: Atomic Dog Pub