| Literature DB >> 28428814 |
Ai Shioda1, Etsuko Tadaka2, Ayako Okochi2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Community integration is an essential right for people with schizophrenia that affects their well-being and quality of life, but no valid instrument exists to measure it in Japan. The aim of the present study is to develop and evaluate the reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Community Integration Measure (CIM) for people with schizophrenia.Entities:
Keywords: Community integration; Japanese; Reliability; Scale development; Schizophrenia; Validity
Year: 2017 PMID: 28428814 PMCID: PMC5393028 DOI: 10.1186/s13033-017-0138-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst ISSN: 1752-4458
Characteristics of study participants (n = 263)
| n | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Demographic characteristics | ||
| Age (years) (mean ± SD) | 46.2 ± 9.6 | |
| Sex | ||
| Male | 182 | 69.2 |
| Female | 81 | 30.8 |
| Household membership | ||
| Family members | 167 | 63.5 |
| Live-alone | 67 | 25.5 |
| Marital status | ||
| Married | 14 | 5.3 |
| Education status | ||
| Junior high school | 43 | 16.3 |
| High school | 116 | 44.1 |
| College or university | 56 | 21.3 |
| Employment status | ||
| Working | 79 | 30.0 |
| Budget | ||
| Sufficient | 110 | 41.9 |
| Insufficient | 153 | 58.1 |
| Cumulative years of psychiatric hospitalization (n = 215) | ||
| <3 months | 36 | 13.7 |
| 3–6 months | 35 | 13.3 |
| 6 months–1 year | 45 | 17.1 |
| 1–5 years | 57 | 21.7 |
| >5 years | 42 | 15.9 |
| Scores of the measures | ||
| The Japanese version of the CIM (mean ± SD) | 35.6 ± 7.7 | |
| LSNS-6 (mean ± SD) | 10.2 ± 5.8 | |
| Social isolation (less than 12 points) | 151 | 57.4 |
| RSE (mean ± SD) | 30.6 ± 7.8 | |
| UCLALS (mean ± SD) | 45.5 ± 11.2 | |
Item analysis of the Japanese version of the CIM
| Item | Mean | SD | Median | Mode | Skewness | Kurtosis | Missing value | IT correlation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | (%) | ||||||||
| 1 | 3.6 | 1.1 | 4.0 | 4.0 | −0.58 | −0.03 | 2 | 0.7 | 0.68 |
| 2 | 3.2 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | −0.37 | −0.05 | 3 | 1.0 | 0.62 |
| 3 | 4.1 | 1.1 | 4.0 | 5.0 | −1.10 | 0.87 | 5 | 1.7 | 0.65 |
| 4 | 3.3 | 1.1 | 3.0 | 3.0 | −0.51 | −0.12 | 3 | 1.0 | 0.77 |
| 5 | 3.4 | 1.2 | 4.0 | 4.0 | −0.53 | −0.54 | 4 | 1.4 | 0.65 |
| 6 | 3.9 | 1.2 | 4.0 | 5.0 | −0.99 | 0.22 | 3 | 1.0 | 0.61 |
| 7 | 3.4 | 1.3 | 4.0 | 4.0 | −0.59 | −0.60 | 3 | 1.0 | 0.66 |
| 8 | 3.7 | 1.2 | 4.0 | 4.0 | −0.82 | 0.05 | 3 | 1.0 | 0.65 |
| 9 | 3.4 | 1.2 | 4.0 | 4.0 | −0.67 | −0.21 | 3 | 1.0 | 0.73 |
| 10 | 3.6 | 1.1 | 4.0 | 4.0 | −0.77 | 0.03 | 4 | 1.4 | 0.75 |
| Total | 35.6 | 7.7 | 36.0 | 39.0 | −0.65 | 0.46 | 5 | 1.7 | |
Exploratory factor analysis of the Japanese version of the CIM (n = 263)
| Item | Factor loading | Communality | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | I feel that I am accepted in this community | 0.77 | 0.59 |
| 10 | I have something to do in this community during the main part of my day that is useful and productive | 0.71 | 0.51 |
| 9 | There are things that I can do in this community for fun in my free time | 0.69 | 0.47 |
| 1 | I feel like a part of this community, like I belong here | 0.66 | 0.43 |
| 3 | I know the rules in this community, and I can fit in with them | 0.61 | 0.37 |
| 5 | I can be independent in this community | 0.60 | 0.36 |
| 7 | There are people to whom I feel close in this community | 0.60 | 0.35 |
| 8 | I know a number of people in this community well enough to say hello and have them say hello back | 0.60 | 0.35 |
| 2 | I know my way around this community | 0.57 | 0.32 |
| 6 | I like where I’m living now | 0.53 | 0.29 |
Maximum-likelihood estimation
Fig. 1The results obtained from the confirmatory factor analysis of the Japanese version of the CIM