| Title |
Development and validation of the pulmonary tuberculosis scale of the system of Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases (QLICD-PT)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12955-018-0960-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yanchun Sun, Zheng Yang, Chonghua Wan, Chuanzhi Xu, Liuping Chen, Lin Xu, Xiaoqing Zhang, Fei Yan |
| Abstract |
Generic assessments are less responsive to subtle changes due to specific diseases, making it challenging to fully understand the impact of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) on patient's quality of life (QOL). We applied programmed decision procedures and theories on instrument development to develop the scale. Two hundred patients with pulmonary TB participated in measuring QOL three times before and after treatments. We assessed the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of QLICD-PT using correlation analysis, factor analysis, multi-trait scaling analysis, randomized block analyses of variance with Least Significant Difference post-hoc tests. We composed QLICD-PT with 3 domains (28 items) for general QOL and 1 pulmonary TB specific domain (12 items). Correlation and factor analysis confirmed good structure validity and criterion-related validity when using Chinese version of the Medical Outcomes Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) as a criterion. The internal consistency of α values were higher than 0.70. The score changes after treatment were of statistical significance for the overall scale, physical domain and specific domain with effect size ranging from 0.32 to 0.72. No floor effects but small ceiling effects were observed at domain level. As the first pulmonary TB-specific QOL scale developed by a module approach in Chinese, QLICD-PT has an acceptable degree of validity, reliability and responsiveness, and can be used to measure the life quality of PT patients specifically and sufficiently. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 12% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 31 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 31 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,982,598
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#398
of 2,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,215
of 326,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#35
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,189 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.