medigraphic.com
ISSN 0016-3813 (Impreso)

2018, Número 4

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Gac Med Mex 2018; 154 (4)


Validación de un cuestionario para medir la habilidad de la población general para evaluar afirmaciones acerca de tratamientos médicos

Pérez-Gaxiola G, Austvoll-Dahlgren A

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 27
Paginas: 480-495
Archivo PDF: 372.39 Kb.


RESUMEN

Introducción: Todos los días, las personas se enfrentan a afirmaciones acerca de tratamientos en medios de comunicación, redes sociales o por viva voz. Objetivo: Validar un cuestionario en español para medir las habilidades de un individuo para evaluar afirmaciones acerca de tratamientos. Método: Veintidós preguntas de opción múltiple de la base de datos Claim Evaluation Tools fueron traducidas y aplicadas a 172 niños y 268 adultos. Mediante un modelo Rasch se exploró el ajuste promedio e individual por reactivo, el potencial comportamiento diferencial del reactivo (basado en el género, edad y modo de aplicación), la multidimensionalidad y la independencia local. Resultados: El ajuste promedio por reactivo fue apropiado. Cuatro preguntas de opción múltiple mostraron pobre ajuste. La fiabilidad del cuestionario fue satisfactoria, con un índice de separación de 0.7. Las preguntas de opción múltiple fueron unidimensionales, y no hubo dependencia específica. Conclusión: Se obtuvo un conjunto de 18 preguntas de opción múltiple con ajuste satisfactorio. El cuestionario es el primero disponible y validado en español para medir las habilidades de los individuos para evaluar afirmaciones acerca de tratamientos.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Lewis M, Orrock P, Myers S. Uncritical reverence in CM reporting: assessing the scientific quality of Australian news media reports. Health Sociol Rev. 2010;19:57-72.

  2. Glenton C, Paulsen E, Oxman A. Portals to Wonderland? Health portals lead confusing information about the effects of health care. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2005;5:7:8.

  3. Moynihan R, Bero L, Ross-Degnan D, Henry D, Lee K, Watkins J, et al. Coverage by the news media of the benefits and risks of medications. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1645-1650.

  4. Wolfe R, Sharp LK, Lipsky MS. Content and design attributes of antivaccination web sites. JAMA. 2002;287:3245-3248.

  5. Woloshin S, Schwartz L, Byram S, Sox H, Fischhoff B, Welch H. Women’s understanding of the mammography screening debate. Arch Int Med. 2000;160:1434-1440.

  6. Fox S, Duggan M. Health Online 2013. [Consultado 2013 Apr 09]. Disponible en: http //www pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Health-online.aspx

  7. Robinson EJ, Kerr CE, Stevens AJ, Lilford RJ, Braunholtz DA, Edwards SJ, et al. Lay public’s understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials. Health Technol Assess. 2005;9:1-192.

  8. Sillence E, Briggs P, Harris PR, Fishwick L. How do patients evaluate and make use of online health information? Soc Sci Med. 2007; 64:1853-1862.

  9. Horsley T, Hyde C, Santesso N, Parkes J, Milne R, Stewart R. Teaching critical appraisal skills in healthcare settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;9:CD001270.

  10. Stacey D, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Col NF, Eden KB, Holmes-Rovner M, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;1:CD001431.

  11. Evans I, Thornton H, Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Testing treatments: better research for better healthcare. Second edition. London: Pinter & Martin; 2011.

  12. The BMJ Opinon. [Blog]. Chalmers I, Glasziou P, Badenoch D, Atkinson P, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Oxman A. Evidence Live 2016: promoting informed healthcare choices by helping people assess treatment claims. Disponible en: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2016/05/26/evidence-live- 2016-promoting-informed-healthcare-choices-by-helping-people-assess- treatment-claims

  13. Roundtable on Health Literacy, Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice, Institute of Medicine. Health literacy: improving health, health systems, and health policy around the world: workshop summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2013. Disponible en: https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK202445

  14. Menzin J, Lang KM, Levy P, Levy E. A general model of the effects of sleep medications on the risk and cost of motor vehicle accidents and its application to France. Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19:69-78.

  15. Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Nsangi A, Semakula D. Interventions and assessment tools addressing key concepts people need to know to appraise claims about treatment effects: a systematic mapping review. Syst Rev. 2016;5:215.

  16. Semakula D, Nsangi A, Oxman M, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Rosenbaum S, Kaseje M, et al. Can an educational podcast improve the ability of parents of primary school children to assess claims about the benefits and harms of treatments? Protocol for a randomized trial. BMC. 2017;18(31). Disponible en: https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral com/articles/10.1186/ s13063-016-1745-y

  17. Informed Health Choices. [Sitio web]. Nsangi A, Semakula D, Oxman M., Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Rosenbaum S, Kaseje M, et al. Resources to teach children in low income countries to assess claims about treatment effects. Protocol for a randomized trial. Informed Health Choices; 2016. Disponible en: http://www informedhealthchoices.org/wp-content/ uploads/2016/08/IHC-Process-Evaluation-School-resources_final-1.pdf

  18. Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Semakula D, Nsangi A, Oxman A, Chalmers I, Rosenbaum S, et al. Measuring ability to assess claims about treatment effects: the development of the ‘Claim Evaluation Tools’. BMJ Open. 2017;7(5). Disponible en: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/7/5/e013184

  19. Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Guttersrud G, Nsangi A, Semakula D, Oxman A, group. TI. Measuring ability to assess claims about treatment effects: a latent trait analysis of the “Claim Evaluation Tools” using Rasch modelling. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e013185.

  20. Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Oxman AD, Chalmers I, Nsangi A, Glenton C, Lewin S, et al. Key concepts that people need to understand to assess claims about treatment effects. J Evid Based Med. 2015;8:112-125.

  21. Linacre J. Sample size and item calibration (stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions. 1994;7(4):328.

  22. Rasch-analysis.com. http://www rasch-analysis.com

  23. Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:1358-1362.

  24. Guttersrud O, Dalane JO, Pettersen S. Improving measurement in nutrition literacy research using Rasch modelling: examining construct validity of stage-specific ‘critical nutrition literacy’ scales. Public Health Nutr. 2014;17:877-883.

  25. Conaghan PG, Emerton M, Tennant A. Internal construct validity of the Oxford Knee Scale: evidence from Rasch measurement. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:1363-1367.

  26. Tennant A, McKenna SP, Hagell P. Application of Rasch analysis in the development and application of quality of life instruments. Value Health. 2004;7:S22-S26.

  27. Psylab Group. Introductory Rasch analysis using RUMM2030. The Section of Rehabilitation Medicine. University of Leeds; 2016




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com