Astrid K Wahl1, Richard H Osborne2, Eva Langeland3, Tore Wentzel-Larsen4, Anne Marit Mengshoel5, Lis Ribu6, Kari Peersen7, Gerald R Elsworth8, Sandra Nolte9. 1. Department of Health Sciences, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: a.k.wahl@medisin.uio.no. 2. Deakin Univerity, Health Systems Improvement Unit, School of Health and Social Development, Geelong, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: richard.osborne@deakin.edu.au. 3. Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Bergen University College, Norway. Electronic address: eva.langeland@hib.no. 4. Centre for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway; Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies, Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: tore.wentzel-larsen@r-bup.no. 5. Department of Health Sciences, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: a.m.mengshoel@medisin.uio.no. 6. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing, Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: lis.ribu@hioa.no. 7. Vestfold Hospital Trust, Norway. Electronic address: kari.peersen@siv.no. 8. Deakin Univerity, Health Systems Improvement Unit, School of Health and Social Development, Geelong, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: gerald.elsworth@deakin.edu.au. 9. Deakin Univerity, Health Systems Improvement Unit, School of Health and Social Development, Geelong, VIC, Australia; Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center for Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: sandra.nolte@charite.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To undertake a rigorous psychometric evaluation of the widely used eight-scale heiQ version 2.0 (evaluating immediate effects of self-management interventions) in diverse patient groups in Norway. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data were collected from 1019 Norwegians. Data were extracted from studies among people with musculoskeletal disorders (n=516), psoriasis (n=254), heart disease (n=97), and Type 2 diabetes (n=152). To investigate the factorial validity of the Norwegian heiQ, confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were carried out using Mplus. RESULTS: One-factor model fit, without modifications, was acceptable for the Emotional distress scale. Only one correlated residual was required to be fitted in each of the other scales to achieve satisfactory model fit. The postulated highly restricted full eight-factor model (no cross-loadings, no correlated residuals) showed good fit to the data. Internal consistency was acceptable for most scales (0.72-0.90) but low for Self-monitoring and insight. CONCLUSION: This study of the Norwegian heiQ replicates the factor structure of the original Australian heiQ, using robust and highly restricted CFA procedures, demonstrating a clean independent clusters model structure. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Researchers, program implementers and policymakers could use the Norwegian heiQ with confidence to generate reliable information on program outcomes and support quality improvement activities.
OBJECTIVE: To undertake a rigorous psychometric evaluation of the widely used eight-scale heiQ version 2.0 (evaluating immediate effects of self-management interventions) in diverse patient groups in Norway. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data were collected from 1019 Norwegians. Data were extracted from studies among people with musculoskeletal disorders (n=516), psoriasis (n=254), heart disease (n=97), and Type 2 diabetes (n=152). To investigate the factorial validity of the Norwegian heiQ, confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were carried out using Mplus. RESULTS: One-factor model fit, without modifications, was acceptable for the Emotional distress scale. Only one correlated residual was required to be fitted in each of the other scales to achieve satisfactory model fit. The postulated highly restricted full eight-factor model (no cross-loadings, no correlated residuals) showed good fit to the data. Internal consistency was acceptable for most scales (0.72-0.90) but low for Self-monitoring and insight. CONCLUSION: This study of the Norwegian heiQ replicates the factor structure of the original Australian heiQ, using robust and highly restricted CFA procedures, demonstrating a clean independent clusters model structure. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Researchers, program implementers and policymakers could use the Norwegian heiQ with confidence to generate reliable information on program outcomes and support quality improvement activities.
Authors: Heidi B Bringsvor; Eva Langeland; Bjørg Frøysland Oftedal; Knut Skaug; Jörg Assmus; Signe Berit Bentsen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Judy W Ammerlaan; Harmieke van Os-Medendorp; Jacob K Sont; Gerald R Elsworth; Richard H Osborne Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Andrea Pozza; Richard H Osborne; Gerald R Elsworth; Giacomo Gualtieri; Fabio Ferretti; Anna Coluccia Journal: Psychol Res Behav Manag Date: 2020-05-19