nav emailalert searchbtn searchbox tablepage yinyongbenwen piczone journalimg journalInfo journalinfonormal searchdiv searchzone qikanlogo popupnotification paper paperNew
2020, 03, v.49 422-426+433
SF-36量表评价新疆图瓦成人生命质量的信度效度
基金项目(Foundation):
邮箱(Email):
DOI: 10.19813/j.cnki.weishengyanjiu.2020.03.013
发布时间: 2020-05-30
出版时间: 2020-05-30
移动端阅读
摘要:

目的评价SF-36生活质量量表用于测量新疆图瓦成人生活质量的信度和效度。方法采用多阶段抽样的方法,于2016年在新疆阿勒泰地区哈巴河县白哈巴村和布尔津县喀纳斯、禾木村,随机抽取了437名图瓦成年人作为调查对象(男性227人,女性210人;18~29岁占30.66%、30~49岁占54.00%、≥50岁占15.33%)。使用SF-36量表评价生命质量,用内部一致性信度和折半信度评价量表信度;采用集合效度、区分效度和结构效度评价量表的效度。结果 SF-36量表的Cronbach’α系数为0.838,删除相应维度后的Cronbach’α系数均>0.750。Spearman-Brown系数为0.828。集合、区分效度定标试验成功率分别为100%和99.59%。将35个条目纳入探索性因子分析,用最大平衡化旋转法提取7个公因子,累计贡献率为68.97%。将8维度纳入探索性因子分析,提取2个公因子,累计贡献率为66.44%。验证性因子分析模型拟合结果不理想。结论 SF-36量表用于评价新疆图瓦成年人生活质量有良好的信度、集合与区分效度,结构效度有待提高。

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE To assess the reliability and validity of SF-36 scale in measuring quality of life of Tuva adults in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. METHODS A total of 437 Tuva adults were selected by multistage sampling method, in Tuva families lived in Baihaba Village Habahe county and Kanasi and Hemu Villages Buerjin County in Artay Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region in 2016,including 100 males and 50 females, the three age groups 18-29, 30-49, 50 and above accounted for 30.66%, 54.00% and 15.33% respectively. SF-36 scale was be used to measure the quality of life. The scale's reliability was assessed by internal consistency reliability and half-fold reliability, and the validity was assessed by set validity,discriminate validity and structural validity. RESULTS The Cronbach's α coefficient of the SF-36 scale was 0.838,and all of the Cronbach's α coefficients were more than 0.750 after corresponding dimensions were deleted. The Spearman-Brown coefficient was 0.828. The achievement ratio of aggregation tests and discrimination tests were 100% and 99.59%,respectively. Thirty-five items were included in EFA. Seven common factors were extracted through maximum balanced rotation method, and the cumulative contribution rate was 68.97%. Eight-dimensional data were included in EFA, and two common factors were extracted with a cumulative contribution rate of 66.44%. The fitting degree of confirmatory factor analysis model is invalid. CONCLUSION SF-36 has showed a good reliability, set validity and discrimination validity in evaluating the quality of life of Tuva adults in Xinjiang, but its structural validity needs to be improved.

参考文献

[1] ORFELD M,BUUINGER M,NANTKE J,et al.The version 2.0 of the SF-36 Health Survey:results of a population-representative study[J].Soz Praventivmed,2005,50(5):292-300.

[2] MADSEN L B,KIRKEGAARD P,PEDERSEN E B.Health-related quality of life(SF-36) during telemonitoring of home blood pressure in hypertensive patients:a randomized,controlled study[J].Blood Press,2008,17(4):227-232.

[3] 新疆维吾尔统计局.新疆统计年鉴(2017)[M].北京:中国统计出版社,2017.

[4] 王萍,王鹏.我国图瓦人生活方式研究[J].新疆社科论坛,2007(6):89-91.

[5] 张永科,陈争,范安,等.新疆阿勒泰地区图瓦人与邻近人群遗传关系初探[J].遗传,2009,31(8):818-824.

[6] 李鲁,王红妹,沈毅.SF-36健康调查量表中文版的研制及其性能测试[J].中华预防医学杂志,2002,36(2):109-113.

[7] 郑日昌,蔡永红,周益群.心理测量学[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1999:46-47.

[8] SHEIKH K A,YAGOUB U,ELSATOUHY M,et al.Reliability and validity of the arabic version of the sf-36 health survey questionnaire in population of Khat Chewers-Jazan Region-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia[J].Appl Res Qual Life,2015,10(1):1-13.

[9] 李灿,辛玲.调查问卷的信度与效度的评价方法研究[J].中国卫生统计,2008,25(5):541-544.

[10] BERGLUND A L,ERICSSON K.Different meanings of quality of life:a comparison between what elderly persons and geriatric staff believe is of importance[J].Int J Nurs Pract,2003,9(2):112-119.

[11] 孙振球.医学统计学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2004:28.

[12] 徐秀娟,倪进东,王效军.基于二阶验证性因子分析的SF-36量表结构效度的分析[J].中国卫生统计,2013,30(6):846-848.

[13] 黄子杰.心理行为研究的统计学技术[M].北京:煤炭工业出版社,1999:132.

[14] 温忠麟,侯杰泰,马什赫伯特.结构方程模型检验:拟合指数与卡方准则[J].心理学报,2004,36(2):186-194.

[15] 潘廷芳,司超增,何慧婧,等.我国6省市人群的健康相关生命质量研究[J].基础医学与临床,2011,31(6):636-641.

[16] 王东博,王子琪,曲波,等.东港市老年人生命质量影响因素研究[J].实用预防医学,2017,24 (10):1165-1167.

[17] 潘雁,叶颖,朱珺,等.应用SF-36量表分析高血压患者生命质量(QOL)的影响因素[J].复旦学报(医学版),2014,41(2):205-209.

[18] 王山,樊文洁,俞婉琦,等.SF-36量表应用于城市化居民生命质量评价的信度和效度分析[J].中华流行病学杂志,2016,37(3):344-347.

[19] 周标.浙江省老年人群生命质量及个性化健康干预模式的评价[D].杭州:浙江大学,2011.

[20] 叶华容,许珊丹,李国栋,等.SF-36简明生活质量量表应用于慢性前列腺炎病人的信度和效度分析[J].中国卫生事业管理,2019,36(1):66-68.

[21] 陈仁友,廖东铭,李向红,等.SF-36量表在农村老年人生命质量测定的信度和效度评价[J].广西医科大学学报,2005(2):237-239.

[22] 龚晓妍,赵岳,魏力,等.SF-36量表应用于天津市滨海新区职业人群的信度和效度研究[J].天津医科大学学报,2019,25(4):408-411.

[23] 赵华硕,王可,金英良,等.农村空巢老人SF-36量表应用信度及效度评价[J].中国公共卫生,2012,28 (7):887-889.

[24] 韩凤婵,史玉坤,邵小丽,等.SF-36量表用于大学生自我健康状况测评的信度和效度分析[J].中国校医,2015,29(12):915-917.

[25] 夏聪,杨枭楠,吴伟旋,等.SF-36量表应用于广州市中青年知识分子的信度和效度评价[J].中国医药导报,2016,13(26):56-59.

[26] 李莉,陈善佳,方云华,等.中文版SF-36用于评价亚急性脑卒中患者生存质量的信度和效度[J].中国康复医学杂志,2013,32(5):509-515.

[27] 李跃平,黄子杰.验证性因子分析在量表结构效度考核中作用[J].中国公共卫生,2007,23(10):1198-1199.

[28] 廖加强,罗敏,张菊英.SF-36量表测量腰椎间盘突出所致坐骨神经痛患者生命质量的信度及效度研究[J].中国卫生事业管理,2013,30(2):144-145.

[29] 卢瑾,钟宝亮,许秀峰.中文版SF-36用于海洛因依赖者的心理测量学特性研究[J].中国药物依赖性杂志,2013,22(2):116-121.

基本信息:

DOI:10.19813/j.cnki.weishengyanjiu.2020.03.013

中图分类号:R195

引用信息:

[1]王珊,夏云婷,陈国良,等.SF-36量表评价新疆图瓦成人生命质量的信度效度[J].卫生研究,2020,49(03):422-426+433.DOI:10.19813/j.cnki.weishengyanjiu.2020.03.013.

发布时间:

2020-05-30

出版时间:

2020-05-30

引用

GB/T 7714-2015 格式引文
MLA格式引文
APA格式引文