Gender medicine · 2011
NorVold Abuse Questionnaire for men (m-NorAQ): validation of new measures of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse and abuse in health care in male patients.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Swahnberg Katarina
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are far more prevalence studies on abuse of females than on males as subjects of abuse. The NorVold Abuse Questionnaire (NorAQ) measures emotional, physical, and sexual abuse, as well as abuse in health care, in women and men.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the questions in the version of NorAQ administered to men (m-NorAQ) against the interview model.
METHODS: The validation was tested in a subsample (n = 86) of a male patient sample who had filled out the m-NorAQ (N = 1667). Respondents completed m-NorAQ twice and were then interviewed. Before the interview, respondents were instructed to answer questions based on personal experience. The interview consisted of 4 open-ended questions about lifetime experiences of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse and abuse in health care.
RESULTS: Results indicated that respondents in the subsample had discussed the experiences of abuse more often in both formal and informal settings than had subjects in the total patient sample. Measures of sensitivity for m-NorAQ were good to excellent (emotional abuse, 83%; physical abuse, 76%; sexual abuse, 68%; abuse in health care, 93%), as were those for specificity (emotional abuse, 72%; physical abuse, 92%; sexual abuse, 99%, abuse in health care, 90%); likelihood ratios were satisfactory (emotional abuse, 3; physical abuse, 9; sexual abuse, 46; abuse in health care, 9); and test-retest reliability measures were excellent (emotional abuse, 80%-95%; physical abuse, 77%-88%; sexual abuse, 91%-100%; abuse in health care, 84%-92%).
CONCLUSION: m-NorAQ showed good to excellent concurrent validity for the different types of abuse and excellent reliability for all questions about abuse. In spite of methodological challenges, validation studies must be conducted as a minimum precaution to ensure that an instrument accurately measures abuse as intended.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the questions in the version of NorAQ administered to men (m-NorAQ) against the interview model.
METHODS: The validation was tested in a subsample (n = 86) of a male patient sample who had filled out the m-NorAQ (N = 1667). Respondents completed m-NorAQ twice and were then interviewed. Before the interview, respondents were instructed to answer questions based on personal experience. The interview consisted of 4 open-ended questions about lifetime experiences of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse and abuse in health care.
RESULTS: Results indicated that respondents in the subsample had discussed the experiences of abuse more often in both formal and informal settings than had subjects in the total patient sample. Measures of sensitivity for m-NorAQ were good to excellent (emotional abuse, 83%; physical abuse, 76%; sexual abuse, 68%; abuse in health care, 93%), as were those for specificity (emotional abuse, 72%; physical abuse, 92%; sexual abuse, 99%, abuse in health care, 90%); likelihood ratios were satisfactory (emotional abuse, 3; physical abuse, 9; sexual abuse, 46; abuse in health care, 9); and test-retest reliability measures were excellent (emotional abuse, 80%-95%; physical abuse, 77%-88%; sexual abuse, 91%-100%; abuse in health care, 84%-92%).
CONCLUSION: m-NorAQ showed good to excellent concurrent validity for the different types of abuse and excellent reliability for all questions about abuse. In spite of methodological challenges, validation studies must be conducted as a minimum precaution to ensure that an instrument accurately measures abuse as intended.