Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Head and Neck Information Needs Questionnaire for patients with head and neck cancer and their caregivers
Yu Li, Lihui Liu, Rong Yan, Chunxiang Su, Hong Guo, Xiaoyu Li, Shujin Yue
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Qilu Hospital of Shandong University Capital Medical University Beijing Shijitan Hospital
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Head and Neck Information Needs Questionnaire (HaNiQ). METHODS: The HaNiQ was translated into a Chinese version using internationally recognized forward- and back-translation procedures. The reliability and validity of the HaNiQ were measured using Cronbach's α coefficient, split-half reliability, exploratory factor analysis, and Pearson correlation analysis. RESULTS: A total of 207 patients in different head and neck cancer (HNC) stages and 174 caregivers completed the Chinese version of the HaNiQ. Internal consistencies varied between good and very well (Cronbach's α coefficient 0.74-0.90); the split-half coefficient and the content validity index (CVI) of the questionnaire were 83.5% and 83.33%, respectively. The cumulative contribution rates of the 5 subscales in patients with HNCand their caregivers were 62.41% and 61.19%, respectively. However, there are some differences between the Chinese questionnaire for caregiver and the original questionnaire regarding the attribution of items. Items 22, 23, and 27 in the Psychosocial subscale of the English version were assigned to the Survivorship subscale in the Chinese version for caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated that the Chinese version of the HaNiQ is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring the information needs of patients with HNC and that of their caregivers. Though the structure of the Chinese version was different from the English version for caregivers of HNC patients, the Chinese version of the HaNiQ appears to be reliable and would benefit from further testing.
逐年被引趋势
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
社会科学Health Education and Validation
Cancer survivorship and care · Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
参考文献 39
此处列出前 3 条
引用本文 2
按被引量排序,此处列出前 3 条