ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2020
Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Toronto Hospital Alertness Test.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlertness is an important part of attention which is different from the opposite of sleepiness. This study aimed to translate and assess the measurement properties of the Toronto Hospital Alertness Test (THAT) in Hong Kong Chinese population.
methodsThe standard forward-backward translation procedure and cognitive debriefing were conducted to obtain the Chinese THAT. One hundred Chinese adults completed the Chinese THAT, the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and the Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS) by telephone interviews.
resultsThe factorial validity was assessed by confirmatory factor analysis, and the internal reliability was examined by coefficient omega. The two negatively worded items of the THAT had low factor loadings and were removed. One more item was removed based on the modification indices of the eight-item model. The remaining seven-item THAT showed satisfactory unidimensionality with root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.06, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.08, and comparative fit index (CFI) = 1.00. The coefficient omega of the seven-item Chinese THAT was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74-0.86). Convergent validity was demonstrated with THAT moderately associated with CES-D (r = - 0.45, P < 0.01), PSQI (r = - 0.40, P < 0.01), and AIS (r = - 0.45, P < 0.01).
conclusionsThe Chinese version of THAT demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity in a Chinese population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.