Construct validity and invariance of four factors associated with colorectal cancer screening across gender, race, and prior screening.
Construct validity and invariance of four factors associated with colorectal cancer screening across gender, race, and prior screening.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1158/1055-9965.epi-08-0176
复制
发表时间：
2008-09
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Vernon, Sally W.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McQueen, Amy;Tiro, Jasmin A.;Vernon, Sally W.
了解个人对结直肠癌筛查（CRCS）的看法对于制定有效的干预措施以提高对筛查指南的依从性非常重要。在文献中，基于理论的认知和社会心理结构与CRCS有关，但很少有研究评估这种测量方法的心理测量特性。我们假设了一个相关的四因素模型，包括CRCS感知的优点、缺点、社会影响和自我效能。我们还检查了基于性别、种族（白人、非裔美国人）和既往CRCS经验（从未；逾期重复筛查）的亚组测量的不变性。我们使用了一项旨在增加CRCS的行为干预试验参与者的基线（n=1,250）和2周（n=1,036）随访调查数据。仅对假设模型进行了少量修改以提高拟合，并随机抽取一半样本以及随访数据来确认最终模型。结果支持假设的单维结构测量，并表明这些项目可能适用于所有被检查的亚组。与白人相比，非洲裔美国人对评估感知到的CRCS缺点的反应差异更大，这表明种族可能会缓和该样本中感知到的缺点和CRCS之间的关联。赞成、反对、社会影响力和自我效能感与CRCS相关；因此，使用具有已知心理测量特性的量表可以增强研究人员得出关于群体差异和随时间变化的结论的能力，并将其结果与其他研究进行比较。需要在其他人群中进行重复研究，以进一步证明本文报告的量表的结构有效性。
Understanding individuals' perceptions of colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) is important for developing effective interventions to increase adherence to screening guidelines. Theory-based cognitive and psychosocial constructs have been associated with CRCS in the literature, but few studies have evaluated the psychometric properties of such measures. We hypothesized a correlated four-factor model including CRCS perceived pros, cons, social influence, and self-efficacy. We also examined measurement invariance across subgroups based on gender, race (white; African American), and prior CRCS experience (never; overdue for repeat screening). We used baseline (n=1,250) and 2-week (n=1,036) follow-up survey data from participants in a behavioral intervention trial designed to increase CRCS. Only minor modifications were made to the hypothesized model to improve fit, and the final model was confirmed with a random half of the sample, as well as with follow-up data. Results support the hypothesized unidimensional construct measures and suggest that the items may be appropriate for all subgroups examined. Greater variance in responses to items assessing the perceived cons of CRCS was found among African Americans compared with whites, suggesting that race may moderate the association between perceived cons and CRCS in this sample. Pros, cons, social influence, and self-efficacy are associated with CRCS; therefore, using scales with known psychometric properties strengthens researchers' ability to draw conclusions about group differences and changes over time and to compare their results with other studies. Replication studies in other populations are needed to provide further evidence of construct validity for the scales reported here.