European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2019
The Nepean Dyspepsia Index is a valid instrument for measuring quality-of-life in functional dyspepsia.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Jones Michael P, Sato Yuri A, Talley Nicholas J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Nepean Dyspepsia Index (NDI) has been in widespread use since its publication in 1999 and the addition of a short form in 2001. The NDI was one of the first disease-specific quality-of-life instruments created for functional dyspepsia (FD). However, its psychometric properties have never been validated in an independent sample.
AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the NDI in an a-priori driven approach in an independent population.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 289 individuals who fulfilled the Rome criteria for FD enrolled in a randomized placebo-controlled trial (FD treatment trial), we examined construct validity, convergent validity, and internal consistency.
RESULTS: Construct validity was supported in its 25-item unweighted and weighted forms as well as the 10-item short form. All items in the 25-item form yielded considerable (>0.5) standardized loadings on their respective latent variables and all reached statistical significance (P<0.0001), supporting their relationships with the hypothesized domains. Convergent validity was strongly supported, with every domain being correlated with multiple external instruments; the majority of correlations were in the range 0.3-0.5 (in absolute values). The items comprising each domain showed good internal consistency, with the lowest value of Chronbach α at 0.80. Scores based on the short form (10-item) version of the NDI correlated strongly with the full 25-item form (tension ρ=0.88, interference ρ=0.94, eat/drink ρ=0.95, knowledge ρ=0.84 and work/study ρ=0.97; all P<0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The NDI is a valid instrument that can be used to measure the disease-specific impact of FD on quality of life.
AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the NDI in an a-priori driven approach in an independent population.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 289 individuals who fulfilled the Rome criteria for FD enrolled in a randomized placebo-controlled trial (FD treatment trial), we examined construct validity, convergent validity, and internal consistency.
RESULTS: Construct validity was supported in its 25-item unweighted and weighted forms as well as the 10-item short form. All items in the 25-item form yielded considerable (>0.5) standardized loadings on their respective latent variables and all reached statistical significance (P<0.0001), supporting their relationships with the hypothesized domains. Convergent validity was strongly supported, with every domain being correlated with multiple external instruments; the majority of correlations were in the range 0.3-0.5 (in absolute values). The items comprising each domain showed good internal consistency, with the lowest value of Chronbach α at 0.80. Scores based on the short form (10-item) version of the NDI correlated strongly with the full 25-item form (tension ρ=0.88, interference ρ=0.94, eat/drink ρ=0.95, knowledge ρ=0.84 and work/study ρ=0.97; all P<0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The NDI is a valid instrument that can be used to measure the disease-specific impact of FD on quality of life.