Measuring instrument
knowledge, attitudes and practices of people with pulmonary tuberculosis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.2608.3086Keywords:
Tuberculosis, Patients, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Validation Studies, Psychometrics, Nursing AssessmentAbstract
Objective: to build an instrument to attain reliable and valid measurements of the knowledge, attitudes and practices of patients with pulmonary tuberculosis. Methods: methodological study that measured the sensitivity, reliability and validity of the instrument content. Studies of reliability and content validity comprehensibility involved 234 patients with pulmonary tuberculosis. Results: an integrative review was conducted for theoretical foundation. The sensitivity study comprised 30 patients with pulmonary tuberculosis, who had greater knowledge on tuberculosis (12.03) than the control group (9.93). Factor analysis showed that 7 factors explained 67.8% of the variance. Content validity identified a 98.3 % comprehensibility, and the expert trial assessed the sufficiency, clarity, relevance and coherence criteria, showing agreement between judges. Conclusions: the instrument has studies of sensitivity, reliability and content validity that showed it can be applied to patients with pulmonary tuberculosis; nevertheless, cultural and semantic adaptations must be developed for other scenarios.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.