Cross‐cultural adaptation of Life Satisfaction Checklist‐11 among persons with stroke in China: A reliability and validity study

Abstract

Objective The aim of the present study was to develop a cross‐cultural adaptation and to evaluate the validity and reliability of a Chinese version of the LiSat‐11 test. Methods LiSat‐11 was translated into Chinese according to standardized procedures. A cross‐sectional descriptive study was conducted to examine its reliability and validity, in accordance to COnsensus‐based Standards for the election of health Measurements Instruments guidelines, among persons with stroke approximately 3 years after their discharge from rehabilitation. Participants completed the LiSat‐11, 36‐Item Short‐Form Health Survey (SF‐36), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index (BI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). To examine the test–retest reliability, thirty of these participants completed LiSat‐11 again after 2 weeks. Results In total, 60 persons with stroke were recruited. The Chinese version of LiSat‐11 demonstrated good internal consistency with Cronbach's alphas at 0.82. Ceiling effects were found in five of the eleven items of LiSat‐11, and there was a floor effect in one item. LiSat‐11 had moderate to high correlations with SF‐36 with Spearman's correlation coefficient (rho) ranging from 0.44 to 0.73 (p < 0.01) in a concurrent validity test, and high correlations were also found between LiSat‐11 and HADS‐A/D in a convergent validity test with rho = −0.63/−0.67 (p < 0.01). Low correlations with NIHSS, BI and mRS were found in a divergent validity test, rho = −0.25, 0.17 and −0.26, respectively. Conclusion The current study verified that the translated Chinese version of the Life Satisfaction Checklist‐11 is a reliable and valid tool for measuring the life satisfaction of persons with chronic stroke.

A biopsychosocial perspective of mental health risk in Italy during phase two of the COVID-19 lockdown

“…Appraisals include perceptions and interpretations of events with personal meaning, relevant for one's self and future wellbeing (Ashar et al, 2017). Several lines of research have proposed neurocognitive and biological models for the relationship between negative appraisal of events and emotion (Folkman et al, 1986;Lazarus, 1991;Scherer et al, 2001), and a cognitive model that links negative appraisal of life events to depression has been put forward (Sander et al, 2018;Wang et al, 2021). In this context, our results showed that negative appraisals of experience and body interception are associated with worse MH.…”

“…Positive appraisals seem to contribute to homeostasis, representing a signal indicating to the body to return to equilibrium (Burgdorf & Panksepp, 2006). Positive appraisal, a domain covering happiness and life satisfaction, is associated with success across life domains, including social, occupational, physical and psychological health (Wang et al, 2021). Positive appraisals seem to build the physical, intellectual and social capacity to promote long-term survival (Alexander et al, 2021).…”