Internal consistency and construct validity assessment of a revised Facts on Aging Quizfor Flemish nursing students: an exploratory study

Abstract

BackgroundSince more people are reaching older and older ages, healthcare systems are becoming in need of more and more knowledgeable nurses to meet the specific health care needs of older persons. Several instruments exist to measure and evaluate students’ knowledge of older persons, ageing, and gerontological care; however, unequivocal evidence on their use and psychometric properties is scarce. The aim of the study was to validate a revised version of Palmore’s Facts on Aging Quiz (FAQ).MethodsA cross-sectional, exploratory study was conducted. Palmore’s FAQ version 1 and Facts on Aging Mental Health Quiz were used as bases for the development of a revised FAQ instrument. Three researchers translated these instruments into Dutch. A panel of nine experts in geriatric research and gerontological care evaluated the translation and the face and content validity of the instrument. We used a cross-sectional, exploratory design to assess its internal consistency and construct validity. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, exploratory factor analysis, and the known-groups technique were used for these analyses.ResultsBased on the experts’ consensus, a revised version of the FAQ, consisting of 36 items, was produced. Exploratory factor analysis did not reveal underlying constructs suggesting that the revised version encloses a more general concept of knowledge (e.g. about older persons, aging, gerontological care). Using the known-groups technique, we validated the instrument, showing that it discriminates between the knowledge of first- and third-year nursing students. The overall Cronbach’s coefficient of 0.723 was acceptable and changed minimally (from 0.708 to 0.724) when items were removed.ConclusionWe conclude that the revised version of the FAQ can be used to properly evaluate nursing students’ knowledge about older persons and gerontological care, as reasonable reliability and validity were established for this revised version of the FAQ.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2318-14-128) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Ageist attitudes among healthcare professionals and older patients in a geriatric rehabilitation facility and their association with patients' satisfaction with care

“…This quiz has been widely used in a range of settings and was defined by its creator and subsequent authors as an edumetric tool (Cowan, Fitzpatrick, Roberts, & While, ). It has been widely translated and used in a number of international settings, including healthcare facilities, and found to be adaptable to a number of cultural settings and to have good psychometric properties, including validity, consistency and reliability (Helmes, ; Van der Elst, Deschodt, Welsch, Milisen, & de Casterlé, ; Wang et al, ). The original questionnaire has 25 items and is answered with true/untrue replies which measure knowledge of facts about various aspects of ageing, including biological, psychological and social statements (Nuevo, Wetherell, Montorio, Ruiz, & Cabrera, ).…”

“…The questionnaire intended for patients was translated into three languages, Hebrew, Russian, and Arabic, via the back translation method, and patients could choose the language according to their preference. Previous studies have shown that the KOPS and PFAQ have been successfully translated and utilised in a broad range of international settings (Alquwez et al, ; Kiliç & Adibelli, ; Van der Elst et al, ; Wang et al, ). The Ministry of Health questionnaire from which the additional questions were taken was originally available in the three languages used in the study and did not require additional translation.…”

Workplace continuing education for nurses caring for hospitalised older people

“…For the Palmore's Facts on Aging, the Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.22 to 0.43. In other studies, the internal consistency reliability with Cronbach's alpha coefficient has ranged from 0.32 to 0.57 (Lusk, Williams, & Hsuing, ; Van der Elst et al., , respectively).…”

Bridging the intergenerational gap: the outcomes of a student-initiated, longitudinal, inter-professional, inter-generational home visit program

“…A higher score indicates better knowledge about the older persons. The PFAQ has been validated in different groups of learners [39,40].…”