Internal consistency and construct validity assessment of a revised Facts on Aging Quizfor Flemish nursing students: an exploratory study

BMC Geriatrics

Research Article

Bernadette Dierckx de Casterlé¹  Mieke Deschodt¹  Elisa Van der Elst²  Koen Milisen³  Melanie Welsch⁴ 

[1] Department of Public Health & Primary Care, Centre for Health Services and Nursing Research, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35/4, 3000, Leuven, Belgium;University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium;University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium;Department of Public Health & Primary Care, Centre for Health Services and Nursing Research, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35/4, 3000, Leuven, Belgium;Vzw Asster, Halmaalweg 2, 3800, Sint-Truiden, Belgium;

关键词: Education;    Geriatric nursing;    Knowledge;    Nursing;    Nursing students;    Palmore’s Facts on Aging Quizzes;    Psychometrics;    Questionnaires;    Validation studies;   

DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2318-14-128

 received in 2014-05-14, accepted in 2014-11-21,  发布年份 2014

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundSince more people are reaching older and older ages, healthcare systems are becoming in need of more and more knowledgeable nurses to meet the specific health care needs of older persons. Several instruments exist to measure and evaluate students’ knowledge of older persons, ageing, and gerontological care; however, unequivocal evidence on their use and psychometric properties is scarce. The aim of the study was to validate a revised version of Palmore’s Facts on Aging Quiz (FAQ).MethodsA cross-sectional, exploratory study was conducted. Palmore’s FAQ version 1 and Facts on Aging Mental Health Quiz were used as bases for the development of a revised FAQ instrument. Three researchers translated these instruments into Dutch. A panel of nine experts in geriatric research and gerontological care evaluated the translation and the face and content validity of the instrument. We used a cross-sectional, exploratory design to assess its internal consistency and construct validity. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, exploratory factor analysis, and the known-groups technique were used for these analyses.ResultsBased on the experts’ consensus, a revised version of the FAQ, consisting of 36 items, was produced. Exploratory factor analysis did not reveal underlying constructs suggesting that the revised version encloses a more general concept of knowledge (e.g. about older persons, aging, gerontological care). Using the known-groups technique, we validated the instrument, showing that it discriminates between the knowledge of first- and third-year nursing students. The overall Cronbach’s coefficient of 0.723 was acceptable and changed minimally (from 0.708 to 0.724) when items were removed.ConclusionWe conclude that the revised version of the FAQ can be used to properly evaluate nursing students’ knowledge about older persons and gerontological care, as reasonable reliability and validity were established for this revised version of the FAQ.

【 授权许可】

Unknown   
© Van der Elst et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.