Mostrar el registro sencillo del documento

dc.rights.licenseAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional
dc.contributor.advisorSánchez Pedraza, Ricardo
dc.contributor.authorValderrama Rios, Martha Carolina
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-07T14:25:41Z
dc.date.available2023-06-07T14:25:41Z
dc.date.issued2023-04-17
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/83986
dc.descriptionilustraciones, graficas
dc.description.abstractIntroducción: Dada la importancia de la calidad de vida como un desenlace en salud durante la atención de los pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica (ERC) estadio 5 en diálisis, es necesario disponer de evidencia sobre las propiedades clinimétricas de los instrumentos empleados para la medición de este constructo. Objetivo: Establecer las propiedades clinimétricas de la escala Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form 36 (KDQOL-36) para medir calidad de vida en pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica estadio 5 en diálisis en Colombia. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio de validación de escala usando las metodologías de teoría clásica de los test y teoría de respuesta al Ítem. El análisis estadístico incluyó las técnicas de análisis factorial exploratorio y confirmatorio, evaluaciones de validez de criterio concurrente, consistencia interna, confiabilidad test-retest, y sensibilidad al cambio; así como la evaluación de las propiedades de ajuste de los ítems y de las personas, la estimación de los índices de separación y confiabilidad de personas e ítems, la evaluación de ítems redundantes o de regiones del constructo no cubiertas y del número de categorías de respuesta empleadas. Resultados: Se aplico la escala KDQOL-36 a 506 pacientes con diagnóstico de ERC estadio 5 en diálisis, atendidos en cinco unidades renales de Baxter Renal Care Services®, en Bogotá, Colombia. El análisis factorial exploratorio confirmó la estructura de tres factores de la escala, y el análisis factorial confirmatorio mostró un adecuado ajuste del modelo. Se encontraron valores de correlación de Spearman en general >= 0,50 entre los dominios del núcleo específico para la ERC de la escala KDQOL-36 y del Kidney Disease Questionnaire (KDQ). Los coeficientes alfa de Cronbach, omega de McDonald, GLB, y lambda de Guttman, estuvieron entre 0,89 y 0,94, indicando un alto grado de consistencia. Se encontró un alto nivel de correlación-concordancia entre los dos momentos de aplicación del instrumento, con valores para el coeficiente de correlación-concordancia de Lin >= 0,7. Se observaron diferencias significativas entre las medianas de los puntajes obtenidos después de experimentar un evento que pueda modificar la calidad de vida. Se encontraron adecuados índices de confiabilidad (>= 0.85) y separación (> 2.20) tanto para personas como para ítems. Se identificó que los ítems de la escala miden un rango del constructo más reducido que el presentado en esta muestra de pacientes, lo que sugiere considerar la necesidad de incorporar ítems que permitan ampliar el rango para cubrir las mediciones con mejor calidad de vida o con menor impacto de la ERC en el constructo. Conclusiones: La escala KDQOL-36 es un instrumento adecuado para medir calidad de vida en pacientes colombianos con ERC estadio 5 en diálisis. (Texto tomado de la fuente)
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Given the importance of quality of life as a health outcome during the care of patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD) on dialysis, it is necessary to have evidence on the clinimetric properties of the instruments used to measure this construct. Objective: To establish the clinimetric properties of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form 36 (KDQOL-36) scale to measure quality of life in patients with stage 5 CKD on dialysis in Colombia. Methods: A scale validation study was conducted using classical test theory and item response theory methodologies. The statistical analysis included exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis techniques, evaluations of concurrent criterion validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and sensitivity to change; as well as the evaluation of item and person fit properties, the estimation of person and item separation and reliability indices, the evaluation of redundant items or regions of the construct not covered, and the number of response categories used. Results: The KDQOL-36 scale was applied to 506 patients with a diagnosis of stage 5 CKD on dialysis, attended in five renal units of Baxter Renal Care Services®, in Bogotá, Colombia. The exploratory factor analysis confirmed the three-factor structure of the scale, and the confirmatory factor analysis showed adequate model fit. Overall Spearman correlation values >= 0.50 were found between the domains of the CKD-specific core of the KDQOL-36 scale and the Kidney Disease Questionnaire (KDQ). Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, GLB, and Guttman's lambda coefficients were between 0.89 and 0.94, indicating a high degree of consistency. A high level of correlation-concordance was found between the two moments of application of the instrument, with values for the correlation-concordance coefficient of Lin >= 0.7. Significant differences were observed between the medians of the scores obtained after experiencing an event that could modify quality of life. Adequate reliability (>= 0.85) and separation (> 2.20) indices were found for both persons and items. It was identified that the scale items measure a narrower range of the construct than the presented in this sample of patients, which suggests considering the need to incorporate items that allow the range to be expanded to cover measurements with better quality of life or less impact of CKD on the construct. Conclusions: The KDQOL-36 scale is an adequate instrument to measure quality of life in Colombian patients with stage 5 CKD on dialysis.
dc.format.extentxvii, 117 páginas
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isospa
dc.publisherUniversidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subject.ddc610 - Medicina y salud::616 - Enfermedades
dc.titleValidación de la escala Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form 36 (KDQOL-36) para la evaluación de la calidad de vida en pacientes colombianos con enfermedad renal crónica
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Maestría
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
dc.publisher.programBogotá - Medicina - Maestría en Epidemiología Clínica
dc.coverage.countryColombia
dc.description.degreelevelMaestría
dc.description.degreenameMagíster en Ciencias Epidemiología Clínica
dc.identifier.instnameUniversidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifier.reponameRepositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifier.repourlhttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/
dc.publisher.facultyFacultad de Medicina
dc.publisher.placeBogotá, Colombia
dc.publisher.branchUniversidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogotá
dc.relation.referencesKidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group. KDIGO 2012 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease. Kidney Int Suppl. 2013;3:1–150.
dc.relation.referencesLevey AS, Eckardt KU, Dorman NM, Christiansen SL, Hoorn EJ, Ingelfinger JR, et al. Nomenclature for kidney function and disease: report of a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Consensus Conference. Kidney Int. 2020;97(6):1117-29.
dc.relation.referencesClarkson KA, Robinson K. Life on dialysis: a lived experience. Nephrol Nurs J. 2010;37(1):29-35.
dc.relation.referencesChen TK, Knicely DH, Grams ME. Chronic Kidney Disease Diagnosis and Management: A Review. JAMA. 2019;322(13):1294-304.
dc.relation.referencesWorld Health Organization. WHOQOL: Measuring Quality of Life. Ginebra: WHO; 1997. Available from: https://bit.ly/317foSB.
dc.relation.referencesEvans RW, Manninen DL, Garrison LP, Jr., Hart LG, Blagg CR, Gutman RA, et al. The quality of life of patients with end-stage renal disease. N Engl J Med. 1985;312(9):553-9.
dc.relation.referencesPagels AA, Soderkvist BK, Medin C, Hylander B, Heiwe S. Health-related quality of life in different stages of chronic kidney disease and at initiation of dialysis treatment. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:71.
dc.relation.referencesWyld MLR, Morton RL, Clayton P, Wong MG, Jardine M, Polkinghorne K, et al. The impact of progressive chronic kidney disease on health-related quality-of-life: a 12-year community cohort study. Qual Life Res. 2019;28(8):2081-90.
dc.relation.referencesPurnell TS, Auguste P, Crews DC, Lamprea-Montealegre J, Olufade T, Greer R, et al. Comparison of life participation activities among adults treated by hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and kidney transplantation: a systematic review. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013;62(5):953-73.
dc.relation.referencesWang Y, Hemmelder MH, Bos WJW, Snoep JD, de Vries APJ, Dekker FW, et al. Mapping health-related quality of life after kidney transplantation by group comparisons: a systematic review. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2021;36(12):2327-39.
dc.relation.referencesLegrand K, Speyer E, Stengel B, Frimat L, Ngueyon Sime W, Massy ZA, et al. Perceived Health and Quality of Life in Patients With CKD, Including Those With Kidney Failure: Findings From National Surveys in France. Am J Kidney Dis. 2020;75(6):868-78.
dc.relation.referencesMapes DL, Lopes AA, Satayathum S, McCullough KP, Goodkin DA, Locatelli F, et al. Health-related quality of life as a predictor of mortality and hospitalization: the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). Kidney Int. 2003;64(1):339-49.
dc.relation.referencesPorter AC, Lash JP, Xie D, Pan Q, DeLuca J, Kanthety R, et al. Predictors and Outcomes of Health-Related Quality of Life in Adults with CKD. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016;11(7):1154-62.
dc.relation.referencesvan Loon IN, Bots ML, Boereboom FTJ, Grooteman MPC, Blankestijn PJ, van den Dorpel MA, et al. Quality of life as indicator of poor outcome in hemodialysis: relation with mortality in different age groups. BMC Nephrol. 2017;18(1):217.
dc.relation.referencesHall RK, Luciano A, Pieper C, Colon-Emeric CS. Association of Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOL-36) with mortality and hospitalization in older adults receiving hemodialysis. BMC Nephrol. 2018;19(1):11.
dc.relation.referencesBabbie, E. (2000). Fundamentos de la Investigación Social. México: Thomson.
dc.relation.referencesKerlinger, F.N. (1988). Investigación del Comportamiento. México: McGraw-Hill.
dc.relation.referencesWeldring T, Smith SM. Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Health Serv Insights. 2013;6:61-8.
dc.relation.referencesKidney Care Quality Alliance. Paent-Reported Outcomes for End-Stage Renal Disease: A Framework and Priories for Measurement. Washington, DC: 2017. Available from: http://kidneycarepartners.com/kidney-care-quality-alliance-kcqa/.
dc.relation.referencesTang E, Bansal A, Novak M, Mucsi I. Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease and Kidney Transplant-Part 1. Front Med (Lausanne). 2017;4:254.
dc.relation.referencesNair D, Wilson FP. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Adults With Kidney Disease: Current Measures, Ongoing Initiatives, and Future Opportunities for Incorporation Into Patient-Centered Kidney Care. Am J Kidney Dis. 2019;74(6):791-802.
dc.relation.referencesMokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(4):539-49.
dc.relation.referencesKuliś D, Bottomley A, Velikova G, Greimel E, Koller M. EORTC quality of life group translation procedure. 4th Ed. Brussels: EORTC Quality of life unit; 2017.
dc.relation.referencesPrieto G, Delgado AR. Análisis de un test mediante el modelo de Rasch. [Rasch-modelling: a test.]. Psicothema. 2003;15:94-100.
dc.relation.referencesHays RD, Kallich JD, Mapes DL, Coons SJ, Carter WB. Development of the kidney disease quality of life (KDQOL) instrument. Qual Life Res. 1994;3(5):329-38.
dc.relation.referencesHays RD, Kallich JD, Mapes DL, Coons SJ, Carter WB. Development of the kidney disease quality of life (KDQOL) instrument. Qual Life Res. 1994;3(5):329-38.
dc.relation.referencesHays RD; Kallich J; Mapes DL; Coons SJ; Carter WB. Kidney Disease and Quality of Life™ (KDQOL™-36), English Version 1. RAND and the University of Arizona; 2000.
dc.relation.referencesAiyegbusi OL, Kyte D, Cockwell P, Marshall T, Gheorghe A, Keeley T, et al. Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in adult patients with chronic kidney disease: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2017;12(6):e0179733.
dc.relation.referencesCarrillo-Algara AJ, Torres-Rodríguez GA, Leal-Moreno CS, Hernández-Zambrano SM. Escalas para evaluar la calidad de vida en personas con enfermedad renal crónica avanzada: revisión integrativa. Enfermería Nefrológica. 2018;21:334-47.
dc.relation.referencesThaweethamcharoen T, Srimongkol W, Noparatayaporn P, Jariyayothin P, Sukthinthai N, Aiyasanon N, et al. Validity and Reliability of KDQOL-36 in Thai Kidney Disease Patient. Value Health Reg Issues. 2013;2(1):98-102.
dc.relation.referencesChen JY, Choi EP, Wan EY, Chan AK, Tsang JP, Chan KH, et al. Validation of the Disease-Specific Components of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life-36 (KDQOL-36) in Chinese Patients Undergoing Maintenance Dialysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0155188.
dc.relation.referencesPeipert JD, Bentler PM, Klicko K, Hays RD. Psychometric Properties of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life 36-Item Short-Form Survey (KDQOL-36) in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis. 2018;71(4):461-8.
dc.relation.referencesSupriyadi R, Rakhima F, Gondodiputro RS, Darmawan G. Validity and Reliability of the Indonesian Version of Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOL-36) Questionnaire in Hemodialysis Patients at Hasan Sadikin Hospital, Bandung, Indonesia. Acta Med Indones. 2019;51(4):318-23.
dc.relation.referencesSupriyadi R, Rakhima F, Gondodiputro RS, Darmawan G. Validity and Reliability of the Indonesian Version of Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOL-36) Questionnaire in Hemodialysis Patients at Hasan Sadikin Hospital, Bandung, Indonesia. Acta Med Indones. 2019;51(4):318-23.
dc.relation.referencesGoh KKK, Lai PSM, Lim SK. Cross cultural adaptation and validation of the Malay Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOL-36). BMC Nephrol. 2019;20(1):226.
dc.relation.referencesGebrie MH, Asfaw HM, Bilchut WH, Lindgren H, Wettergren L. Psychometric properties of the kidney disease quality of life-36 (KDQOL-36) in Ethiopian patients undergoing hemodialysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2022;20(1):24.
dc.relation.referencesYang F, Wang VW, Joshi VD, Lau TW, Luo N. Validation of the English version of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life questionnaire (KDQOL-36) in haemodialysis patients in Singapore. Patient. 2013;6(2):135-41.
dc.relation.referencesWare J, Jr., Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220-33.
dc.relation.referencesRAND corporation. Kidney Disease Quality of Life Instrument (KDQOL). The KDQOL-36™ Survey [Internet]. Available from: https://www.rand.org/health-care/surveys_tools/kdqol.html [accessed on 20 January 2023].
dc.relation.referencesChaves K, Duarte A, Vesga J. Adaptación transcultural del cuestionario KDQOL SF 36 para evaluar calidad de vida en pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica en Colombia. Rev. Med. 2013;21(2):34–42.
dc.relation.referencesKovesdy CP. Epidemiology of chronic kidney disease: an update 2022. Kidney Int Suppl (2011). 2022;12(1):7-11.
dc.relation.referencesHill NR, Fatoba ST, Oke JL, Hirst JA, O'Callaghan CA, Lasserson DS, et al. Global Prevalence of Chronic Kidney Disease - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(7):e0158765.
dc.relation.referencesForeman KJ, Marquez N, Dolgert A, Fukutaki K, Fullman N, McGaughey M, et al. Forecasting life expectancy, years of life lost, and all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 250 causes of death: reference and alternative scenarios for 2016-40 for 195 countries and territories. Lancet. 2018;392(10159):2052-90.
dc.relation.referencesLuxardo R, Kramer A, Gonzalez-Bedat MC, Massy ZA, Jager KJ, Rosa-Diez G, et al. The epidemiology of renal replacement therapy in two different parts of the world: the Latin American Dialysis and Transplant Registry versus the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2018;42:e87.
dc.relation.referencesUnited States Renal Data System. 2022 USRDS Annual Data Report: Epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD, 2022.
dc.relation.referencesLuxardo R, Ceretta L, Gonzalez-Bedat M, Ferreiro A, Rosa-Diez G. The Latin American Dialysis and Renal Transplantation Registry: report 2019. Clin Kidney J. 2022;15(3):425-31.
dc.relation.referencesFondo Colombiano de Enfermedades de Alto Costo, Cuenta de Alto Costo (CAC). Situación la enfermedad renal crónica, la hipertensión arterial y la diabetes mellitus en Colombia 2021; Bogotá D.C. 2022.
dc.relation.referencesKalantar-Zadeh K, Unruh M. Health related quality of life in patients with chronic kidney disease. Int Urol Nephrol. 2005;37(2):367-78.
dc.relation.referencesNaish P. Dialysis and transplantation and the quality of life. Br Med J. 1979;1(6156):122-3.
dc.relation.referencesAlmutary H, Bonner A, Douglas C. Symptom burden in chronic kidney disease: a review of recent literature. J Ren Care. 2013;39(3):140-50.
dc.relation.referencesAlmutary H, Bonner A, Douglas C. Which Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease Have the Greatest Symptom Burden? A Comparative Study of Advanced Ckd Stage and Dialysis Modality. J Ren Care. 2016;42(2):73-82.
dc.relation.referencesJansen DL, Heijmans MJ, Rijken M, Spreeuwenberg P, Grootendorst DC, Dekker FW, et al. Illness perceptions and treatment perceptions of patients with chronic kidney disease: different phases, different perceptions? Br J Health Psychol. 2013;18(2):244-62.
dc.relation.referencesCovic A, Seica A, Gusbeth-Tatomir P, Goldsmith D. Hemoglobin normalization trials in chronic kidney disease: what should we learn about quality of life as an end point? J Nephrol. 2008;21(4):478-84.
dc.relation.referencesHasan LM, Shaheen DAH, El Kannishy GAH, Sayed-Ahmed NAH, Abd El Wahab AM. Is health-related quality of life associated with adequacy of hemodialysis in chronic kidney disease patients? BMC Nephrol. 2021;22(1):334.
dc.relation.referencesDocumentos básicos: cuadragésima novena edición (con las modificaciones adoptadas hasta el 31 de mayo de 2019) [Basic documents: forty-ninth edition (including amendments adopted up to 31 May 2019)]. Ginebra: Organización Mundial de la Salud; 2020. Licencia: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
dc.relation.referencesKarnorfsky DA, Abelman WH, Craver LF, Burchenal JH. The use of nitrogen mustards in the palliative treatment of cancer. Cancer 1948; 1: 634-6456.
dc.relation.referencesStudy protocol for the World Health Organization project to develop a Quality of Life assessment instrument (WHOQOL). Qual Life Res. 1993;2(2):153-9.
dc.relation.referencesVelarde-Jurado E, Avila-Figueroa C. [Evaluation of the quality of life]. Salud Publica Mex. 2002;44(4):349-61.
dc.relation.referencesRamirez-Velez R, Agredo-Zuniga RA, Jerez-Valderrama AM. [The reliability of preliminary normative values from the short form health survey (SF-12) questionnaire regarding Colombian adults]. Rev Salud Publica (Bogota). 2010;12(5):807-19.
dc.relation.referencesStreiner D, Norman G. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 5rd ed. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press; 2015.
dc.relation.referencesDeVellis R, Thorpe C. Scale development: theory and applications. 5rd ed. Thousand Oaks; California: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2022.
dc.relation.referencesCarmines E, Zeller R. Reliability and validity assessment. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications; 1979.
dc.relation.referencesMuñiz Fernández J. Introducción a la teoría de respuesta a los ítems. Psicometría, editor. Madrid: Ediciones Pirámide; 1997. 249 p.
dc.relation.referencesDeMars C. Item response theory. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. 131 p.
dc.relation.referencesHambleton RK, Swaminathan H, Rogers HJ. Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Newbury Park Calif: Sage Publications; 1991.
dc.relation.referencesEmbretson SE, Reise SP. Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates; 2000. xi, 371 p.
dc.relation.referencesBoone WJ, Staver JR, Yale MS. Rasch analysis in the human sciences: Springer; 2014.
dc.relation.referencesLinacre JM. A user’s guide to winstep rasch-model computer programs, 2022. ISBN 0-941938-03-4.
dc.relation.referencesMcCallum R, Browne M, Sugawara H. Power Analysis and Determination of Sample Size for Covariance Structure Modeling. Psychological Methods. 1996;1(2):130-49.
dc.relation.referencesBentler PM, Yuan KH. Structural Equation Modeling with Small Samples: Test Statistics. Multivariate Behav Res. 1999;34(2):181-97.
dc.relation.referencesGuenther W. Desk calculation of probabilities for the distribution of the sample correlation coefficient. The American Statistician 1977;31(1):45-48.
dc.relation.referencesBonett DG, Wright TA. Sample size requirements for estimating Pearson, Kendall and Spearman correlations. Psychometrika. Springer; 2000;65(1):23–8.
dc.relation.referencesCortina JM. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1993;78:98-104.
dc.relation.referencesNorman GR, Streiner DL. Bioestadística. Madrid: Mosby Doyma Libros; 1996.
dc.relation.referencesLin LI. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 1989;45(1):255-68.
dc.relation.referencesAlarcon JC, Bunch A, Ardila F, Zuniga E, Vesga JI, Rivera A, et al. Impact of Medium Cut-Off Dialyzers on Patient-Reported Outcomes: COREXH Registry. Blood Purif. 2021;50(1):110-8.
dc.relation.referencesKreidler SM, Muller KE, Grunwald GK, Ringham BM, Coker-Dukowitz ZT, Sakhadeo UR, et al. GLIMMPSE: Online Power Computation for Linear Models with and without a Baseline Covariate. J Stat Softw. 2013;54(10).
dc.relation.referencesAssociation between recombinant human erythropoietin and quality of life and exercise capacity of patients receiving haemodialysis. Canadian Erythropoietin Study Group. BMJ. 1990;300(6724):573-8.
dc.relation.referencesLaupacis A, Muirhead N, Keown P, Wong C. A disease-specific questionnaire for assessing quality of life in patients on hemodialysis. Nephron. 1992;60(3):302-6.
dc.relation.referencesDanielsen AK, Pommergaard HC, Burcharth J, Angenete E, Rosenberg J. Translation of questionnaires measuring health related quality of life is not standardized: a literature based research study. PLoS One. 2015;10(5):e0127050.
dc.relation.referencesMcKown S, Acquadro C, Anfray C, Arnold B, Eremenco S, Giroudet C, et al. Good practices for the translation, cultural adaptation, and linguistic validation of clinician-reported outcome, observer-reported outcome, and performance outcome measures. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2020;4(1):89.
dc.relation.referencesOrtiz Montero T, Lugo Boton IK, Montenegro MB, Mejia JC, Baquero L, Mejia-Vergara AJ. Translation and transcultural adaptation of the AS-20 scale to measure quality of life in adults with strabismus in Colombia, a pilot study. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol (Engl Ed). 2022.
dc.relation.referencesBernal-Vargas MA, Cortes JA, Sanchez R. [Cross-cultural adaptation of the community-acquired pneumonia score questionnaire in patients with mild-to-moderate pneumonia in Colombia]. Biomedica. 2017;37(1):104-10.
dc.relation.referencesFontibon LF, Ardila SL, Sanchez R. [Cross-cultural Adaptation of the PedsQL Questionnaire Cancer Module, Version 3.0 for Use in Colombia]. Rev Colomb Psiquiatr. 2017;46(3):161-7.
dc.relation.referencesSanabria M, Tobón J, Certuche MC, Sánchez-Pedraza R. Adaptación transcultural del cuestionario SDIALOR para su utilización en Colombia. Revista de la Facultad de Medicina. 2015;63:99-106.
dc.relation.referencesMasud A, Costanzo EJ, Zuckerman R, Asif A. The Complications of Vascular Access in Hemodialysis. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2018;44(1):57-9.
dc.relation.referencesChuasuwan A, Pooripussarakul S, Thakkinstian A, Ingsathit A, Pattanaprateep O. Comparisons of quality of life between patients underwent peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020;18(1):191.
dc.relation.referencesMorton V, Torgerson DJ. Regression to the mean: treatment effect without the intervention. J Eval Clin Pract. 2005;11(1):59-65.
dc.relation.referencesBarnett AG, van der Pols JC, Dobson AJ. Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(1):215-20.
dc.relation.referencesAnderson JC, Gerbing DW. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin. 1988;103:411-23.
dc.relation.referencesBrown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY, US: The Guilford Press; 2006. xiii, 475-xiii, p.
dc.relation.referencesHolgado–Tello FP, Chacón–Moscoso S, Barbero–García I, Vila–Abad E. Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Quality & Quantity. 2010;44(1):153-66.
dc.relation.referencesKaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974;39:31-6.
dc.relation.referencesBartlett MS. The effect of standardization on a Chi-Square approximation in factor analysis. Biometrika. 1951;38(3-4):337-44.
dc.relation.referencesKaiser HF. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960;20:141-51.
dc.relation.referencesMerenda PF. A Guide to the Proper Use of Factor Analysis in the Conduct and Reporting of Research: Pitfalls to Avoid. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 1997;30(3):156-64.
dc.relation.referencesHair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River NJ: Prentice Hall; 2010.
dc.relation.referencesRietveld T, Hout Rv. Statistical Techniques for the Study of Language and Language Behaviour. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton; 1993.
dc.relation.referencesCattell RB. The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1966;1(2):245-76.
dc.relation.referencesHorn JL. A Rationale and Test for the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis. Psychometrika. 1965;30:179-85.
dc.relation.referencesKahn JH. Factor Analysis in Counseling Psychology Research, Training, and Practice:Principles, Advances, and Applications. The Counseling Psychologist. 2006;34(5):684-718.
dc.relation.referencesPett MA, Lackey NR, Sullivan JJ. Making sense of factor analysis: the use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Thousand Oaks:Sage; 2003.
dc.relation.referencesManzano A, Zamora S. Sistema de ecuaciones estructurales: una herramienta de investigación. Cuaderno técnico 4. México: Centro Nacional de Evaluación para la Educación Superior (CENEVAL); 2009.
dc.relation.referencesline R. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 2nd Edition. New York: Guilford Press; 2005
dc.relation.referencesStataCorp. Stata Structural Equation Modeling Reference Manual Release 17. College Station, Texas: StataCorp; 2021.
dc.relation.referencesRigdon EE, Ferguson CE. The Performance of the Polychoric Correlation Coefficient and Selected Fitting Functions in Confirmatory Factor Analysis with Ordinal Data. Journal of Marketing Research. 1991;28(4):491-7.
dc.relation.referencesLi CH. Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behav Res Methods. 2016;48(3):936-49.
dc.relation.referencesMulaik SA, James LR, Van Alstine J, Bennett N, Lind S, Stilwell CD. Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin. 1989;105:430-45.
dc.relation.referencesBentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull. 1990;107(2):238-46.
dc.relation.referencesHu Lt, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1-55.
dc.relation.referencesSchreiber JB. Update to core reporting practices in structural equation modeling. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2017;13(3):634-43.
dc.relation.referencesBrowne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.) Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 1993. pp. 136-162.
dc.relation.referencesRosseel Y. lavaan: Latent Variable Analysis. 2022. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lavaan.
dc.relation.referencesCronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16(3):297-334.
dc.relation.referencesMcDonald, R.P. (1999). Test Theory: A Unified Treatment (1st ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601087.
dc.relation.referencesWoodhouse B, Jackson PH. Lower bounds for the reliability of the total score on a test composed of non-homogeneous items. II: A search procedure to locate the greatest lower bound. Psychometrika. 1977;42:579-91.
dc.relation.referencesBentler PM, Woodward JA. Inequalities among lower bounds to reliability: With applications to test construction and factor analysis. Psychometrika. 1980;45(2):249-67.
dc.relation.referencesGuttman L. A basis for analyzing test-retest reliability. Psychometrika. 1945;10:255-82.
dc.relation.referencesHayes AF, Coutts JJ. Use Omega Rather than Cronbach’s Alpha for Estimating Reliability. But…. Communication Methods and Measures. 2020;14(1):1-24.
dc.relation.referencesMcNeish D. Thanks coefficient alpha, we'll take it from here. Psychol Methods. 2018;23(3):412-33.
dc.relation.referencesOosterwijk PR, van der Ark LA, Sijtsma K, editors. Numerical Differences Between Guttman’s Reliability Coefficients and the GLB. Quantitative Psychology Research; 2016 2016//; Cham: Springer International Publishing.
dc.relation.referencesTrizano-Hermosilla I, Alvarado JM. Best Alternatives to Cronbach's Alpha Reliability in Realistic Conditions: Congeneric and Asymmetrical Measurements. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016;7.
dc.relation.referencesRevelle W. psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research 2021. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
dc.relation.referencesDinno A. paran: Horn’s Test of Principal Components/Factors. 2018. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=paran.
dc.relation.referencesFox J. polycor: Polychoric and Polyserial Correlations. 2022. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=polycor.
dc.relation.referencesEpskmap S. semPlot: Path Diagrams and Visual Analysis of Various SEM Packages. 2022. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semPlot.
dc.relation.referencesBland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307-10.
dc.relation.referencesMichael LN, Remo O. Handbook of Polytomous Item Response Theory Models. New York: Routledge; 2010.
dc.relation.referencesAndrich D. A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika. 1978;43(4):561-73.
dc.relation.referencesBrentari E, Golia S. Unidimensionality in the Rasch model: how to detect and interpret. Statistica. 2007;67:253-61.
dc.relation.referencesReckase MD. Unifactor Latent Trait Models Applied to Multifactor Tests: Results and Implications. Journal of Educational Statistics. 1979;4(3):207-30.
dc.relation.referencesLinacre J. A user’s guide to winstep rasch-model computer programs, 2006. Chicago: MESA Press; 2009.
dc.relation.referencesWright BD, Linacre JM, Gustafson JE, Martin-Lof P. Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions. 1994; 8(3). 370 p.
dc.relation.referencesChristensen KB, Makransky G, Horton M. Critical Values for Yen's Q3: Identification of Local Dependence in the Rasch Model Using Residual Correlations. Appl Psychol Meas. 2017;41(3):178-94.
dc.relation.referencesBaker FB. The Basics of Item Response Theory. Second Edition [microform] / Frank B. Baker. Assessment ECo, Evaluation, editors. [Washington, D.C.]: Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse; 2001.
dc.relation.referencesBond T, editor Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences, Second Edition. 2001.
dc.relation.referencesMacCallum RC, Roznowski M, Necowitz LB. Model modifications in covariance structure analysis: the problem of capitalization on chance. Psychol Bull. 1992;111(3):490-504.
dc.relation.referencesHogan TP, Benjamin A, Brezinski KL. Reliability Methods: A Note on the Frequency of Use of Various Types. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2000;60(4):523-31.
dc.relation.referencesMiller MB. Coefficient alpha: A basic introduction from the perspectives of classical test theory and structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1995;2(3):255-73.
dc.relation.referencesYang Y, Green SB. Coefficient Alpha: A Reliability Coefficient for the 21st Century? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. 2011;29(4):377-92.
dc.relation.referencesGreen SB, Hershberger SL. Correlated Errors in True Score Models and Their Effect on Coefficient Alpha. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 2000;7(2):251-70.
dc.relation.referencesRevelle W, Zinbarg RE. Coefficients Alpha, Beta, Omega, and the glb: Comments on Sijtsma. Psychometrika. 2008;74(1):145.
dc.relation.referencesDunn TJ, Baguley T, Brunsden V. From alpha to omega: a practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. Br J Psychol. 2014;105(3):399-412.
dc.relation.referencesShapiro A, ten Berge JMF. The asymptotic bias of minimum trace factor analysis, with applications to the greatest lower bound to reliability. Psychometrika. 2000;65(3):413-25.
dc.relation.referencesYen M, Lo LH. Examining test-retest reliability: an intra-class correlation approach. Nurs Res. 2002;51(1):59-62.
dc.relation.referencesRousson V, Gasser T, Seifert B. Assessing intrarater, interrater and test-retest reliability of continuous measurements. Stat Med. 2002;21(22):3431-46.
dc.relation.referencesAtkinson G, Nevill A. Comment on the Use of Concordance Correlation to Assess the Agreement between Two Variables. Biometrics. 1997;53(2):775-7.
dc.relation.referencesBoateng GO, Neilands TB, Frongillo EA, Melgar-Quinonez HR, Young SL. Best Practices for Developing and Validating Scales for Health, Social, and Behavioral Research: A Primer. Front Public Health. 2018;6:149.
dc.relation.referencesMullis IVS, Martin MO, Cotter KE, Centurino VAS. TIMSS 2019 item writing guidelines. Retrieved from Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. 2017.
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject.decsComodidad del paciente
dc.subject.decsPatient Comfort
dc.subject.decsPacientes
dc.subject.decsPatients
dc.subject.proposalInsuficiencia Renal Crónica
dc.subject.proposalCalidad de vida
dc.subject.proposalEstudio de validación
dc.subject.proposalColombia
dc.subject.proposalKidney Failure Chronic
dc.subject.proposalQuality of Life
dc.subject.proposalValidation Studies
dc.title.translatedValidation of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form 36 (KDQOL-36) scale for the evaluation of quality of life in Colombian patients with chronic kidney disease
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_bdcc
dc.type.coarversionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aa
dc.type.contentText
dc.type.redcolhttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TM
oaire.accessrightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2


Archivos en el documento

Thumbnail

Este documento aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del documento

Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 InternacionalEsta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0.Este documento ha sido depositado por parte de el(los) autor(es) bajo la siguiente constancia de depósito