Browsing Health Studies by Subject "Cross-Cultural Comparison"
Now showing items 1-2 of 2
Cross-cultural comparison of the perceptions and experiences of dementia care mapping "mappers" in the United States and the United KingdomOBJECTIVE: Survey results from 161 respondents trained in dementia care mapping (DCM) in the United States and United Kingdom (82 and 79 respondents, respectively) addressed the following: (a) To what extent are mappers using DCM? (b) How satisfied are mappers with DCM? (c) What affect does DCM have on mappers' attitudes toward their dementia practice? and (d) What challenges are encountered by mappers in the use of DCM? METHOD: Analyses using odds ratios were used to make international and training-level (basic vs. advanced) comparisons. RESULTS: Differences across countries were found in use of DCM and lack of satisfaction using DCM codes. Similarities were found with positive affects of DCM on attitudes and lack of time for DCM. DISCUSSION: Differences in mappers' experiences and perceptions exist across the two countries, warranting increased attention to the cultural contexts within which mappers are situated and how these affect the implementation of DCM within a country.
Excellent cross-cultural validity, intra-test reliability and construct validity of the Dutch Rivermead Mobility Index in patients after stroke undergoing rehabilitationOBJECTIVE: To investigate the cross-cultural validity of international Dutch-English comparisons when using the Dutch Rivermead Mobility Index (RMI), and the intra-test reliability and construct validity of the Dutch RMI. METHODS: Cross-cultural validity was studied in a combined data-set of Dutch and English patients undergoing rehabilitation after stroke, who were assessed with the Dutch version of the RMI and the original English RMI, respectively. Mokken scale analysis was used to investigate unidimensionality, monotone homogeneity model fit, and differential item functioning between the Dutch and the English RMI. Intra-test reliability and construct validity were studied in the Dutch patients by calculating the reliability coefficient and correlating the Dutch RMI and the Dutch Barthel Index. RESULTS: The RMI was completed for Dutch (n = 200) and English (n = 420) patients after stroke. The unidimensionality and monotone homogeneity model fit of the RMI were excellent: combined Dutch-English data-set (coefficient H = 0.91); Dutch data-set (coefficient H = 0.93); English data-set (coefficient H = 0.89). No differential item functioning was found between the Dutch and the English RMI. The intra-test reliability of the Dutch RMI was excellent (coefficient rho = 0.97). In a sub-sample of patients (n = 91), the Dutch RMI correlated strongly with the Dutch Barthel Index (Spearman's correlation coefficient rho = 0.84). CONCLUSION: The Dutch RMI allows valid international Dutch-English comparisons, and has excellent intra-test reliability and construct validity.