...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health >Reliability and Construct Validity of Two Versions of Chalder Fatigue Scale among the General Population in Mainland China
【24h】

Reliability and Construct Validity of Two Versions of Chalder Fatigue Scale among the General Population in Mainland China

机译:中国大陆普通人群两个版本的Chalder疲劳量表的信度和建构效度

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The 14-item Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS) is widely used, while the 11-item version is seldom to be found in current research in mainland China. The objectives of the present study is to compare the reliability and construct validity between these two versions and to confirm which may be better for the mainland Chinese setting. Based on a cross-sectional health survey with a constructive questionnaire, 1887 individuals aged 18 years or above were selected. Socio-demographic, health-related, gynecological data were collected, and 11-item and 14-item Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS) were used to assess fatigue. Confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) were performed to test the fit of models of the two versions. Confirmatory factor analysis of the two versions of CFS did not support the two-factor theorized models. In addition, a three-factor ESEM model of the 11-item version, but not the 14-item version, showed better factor structure and fitness than the other models examined. Both the versions had good internal consistency reliability and a satisfactory internal consistency (Ω = 0.78–0.96, omega coefficient indicates the internal consistency reliability) was obtained from the optimal model. This study provided evidence for satisfactory reliability and structural validity for the three-factor model of the 11-item version, which was proven to be superior to the 14-item version for this data.
机译:14项Chalder疲劳量表(CFS)被广泛使用,而11项版本在中国大陆目前的研究中很少见。本研究的目的是比较这两个版本之间的信度和结构效度,并确认哪种版本对中国大陆地区可能更好。基于具有建设性问卷的横断面健康调查,选择了1887名18岁或以上的人。收集社会人口学,健康相关的妇科数据,并使用11项和14项Chalder疲劳量表(CFS)评估疲劳。进行了验证性因素分析和探索性结构方程建模(ESEM),以测试两个版本的模型的拟合度。两种版本的CFS的验证性因素分析不支持两因素理论模型。此外,11项版本的三因素ESEM模型而非14项版本的三因素ESEM模型显示出比其他模型更好的因素结构和适用性。两种版本均具有良好的内部一致性可靠性,并且从最佳模型获得了令人满意的内部一致性(Ω= 0.78–0.96,ω系数表示内部一致性可靠性)。这项研究为11项版本的三因素模型提供了令人满意的可靠性和结构有效性的证据,事实证明,该模型优于14项版本的三项模型。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号