Development of the Headache Activities of Daily Living Index: Initial Validity Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop a novel instrument for assessing headache-related disability focusing solely on important activities of daily living. METHODS: Part 1: A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar, supplemented by hand searches in bibliographies to retrieve the original article for any instrument for the assessment of headache-related disability. Each instrument was evaluated for item categories, specific item content, measurement scale format for each item, and instructions to users. Together, these features constituted the construct validity of these instruments. Qualitative evaluations of these results were summarized with respect to the adequacy of each component. Psychometric features such as reliability and validity were not assessed. Part 2: An existing instrument for assessing self-rated disability, the Neck Disability Index, was modified for content and format and subjected to 2 rounds of clinician and patient review. Item contents and formats received final consensus, resulting in a 9-item instrument: the Headache Activities of Daily Living Index (HADLI). This instrument was tested in a sample of headache patients. Cronbach α and individual item correlations were obtained. Principal Components Analysis was performed. RESULTS: Part 1: The search identified 6 reports on 5 preexisting instruments for self-rating of headache-related disability. Problems in content were found in all instruments, especially relating to the lack of items for specific activities of daily living. Problems were noted in most of the instruments for scaling and instructions with respect to the effect of headache on activities of daily living. Part 2: The authors first identified suitable items from an existing instrument for self-rating of disability. These were supplemented by items drawn from the literature. A panel of 3 clinicians and 2 laypersons evaluated these items. Two more focus groups of 7 headache sufferers each reviewed the new instrument. After this, a 9-item instrument for assessing activities of daily living in headache sufferers, the HADLI, was finalized. After this, 53 participants were recruited to study the face validity of the instrument. The sample consisted of 41 women and 12 men with a mean age of 37.3 (12) years; mean duration of headaches was 7.4 (8.3) years; mean frequency of headaches per week was 3.4 (2.4); and the intensity was 6 (2.4). The mean HADLI score was 26.2 (13.4), or 52%. There were no floor or ceiling effects for total score. The total Index Cronbach α was 0.96. The Principal Components Analysis identified one component which accounted for 75% of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: The HADLI was created using theory and empirical-based methods. Face validity was assessed by focus group input and by first-level psychometrics. The HADLI has good face validity and is suitable for further reliability and validity testing.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,029 | 0,058 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».