Psychometric Properties of Jacelon’s Attributed Dignity Scale with Iranian Older People

Abstract

Objective: The main purpose of this study was the psychometric assessment of Jacelon’s Attributed Dignity Scale among Iranian older population. Methods: Using a standard “forward-backward” translation procedure, the original English version of Jacelon’s Attributed Dignity Scale was translated into Persian. Internal consistency of the scale was checked by the Cronbach’s α coefficient. Convergent validity of the instrument was appraised by the Social Skills Scale and General Health Questionnaire. Factor structure of the Iranian version of Jacelon’s Attributed Dignity Scale and possible interplay between its subscales were checked through recruiting a convenient sample of 300 Iranian older people and performing the confirmatory factor analysis. Findings: The estimated Cronbach’s α and intraclass correlation coefficients for the Iranian version of Jacelon’s Attributed Dignity Scale were in the vicinity of acceptable range, that is, 0.87 and 0.93, respectively. The output of confirmatory factor analysis revealed that a four-factor model best fitted the study data (χ2 = 323.49; df = 129; p < 0.001; comparative fit index = 0.913; Tucker–Lewis index = 0.901; root mean square error approximation = 0.074; standardized root mean square residual = 0.078). Rasch estimates of item difficulty ranged from –1.28 (less difficult) to 1.33 (more difficult). No significant cross-gender differences were observed regarding the Iranian version of Jacelon’s Attributed Dignity Scale’s items indicating its invariant psychometric properties for use in the Iranian men and women subgroups. Ethical Considertaion: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee at the Tabriz university of medical science. Informed consent, information confidentiality, and voluntary participation were guaranteed. Conclusion: The study findings were indicative of applicability of the Iranian version of Jacelon’s Attributed Dignity Scale as a reliable tool in measurement of the perceived social dignity among Iranian and probably other Persian-speaking older populations.

Self‐report instruments for measuring patient dignity: A psychometric systematic review

“…The mean score showed an upward trend, which continued 6 months after the intervention, and the methodological quality was rated as ‘very good’. Cross‐cultural validity was assessed in the JADS by Namjoo et al (2020) using Rasch analysis without any item displaying differential item functioning (DIF) across gender and educational status, and the methodological quality was ‘adequate’.…”

“…Two studies (Ge et al, 2016; Rudilla et al, 2016) performed a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and were rated as ‘adequate’ quality, as these studies were affected by inadequate sample sizes ( n = 150 and 70, respectively). One study (Namjoo et al, 2020) performed a CFA and was rated ‘very good’ quality. Six studies (Brudek & Steuden, 2017; Eskigülek & Kav, 2021; Ota et al, 2019; Parpa et al, 2017; Ripamonti et al, 2012; Rodríguez‐Mayoral et al, 2021) performed both CFA and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and were rated ‘very good’ quality.…”

“…Five studies assessed the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Of these, two studies (Jacelon & Choi, 2014; Parpa et al, 2017) were rated ‘very good’ quality, and three (Eskigülek & Kav, 2021; Namjoo et al, 2020; Rullán et al, 2015) were rated ‘adequate’ quality, as the ICC model or the formula was not described. The remaining six studies used other methods (i.e., Pearson's correlation, Linn concordance coefficient, intra‐observer agreement, and Gwet's coefficient) and were rated ‘doubtful’ quality, as these studies did not report on any systematic differences.…”

“…One study (Namjoo et al, 2020) performed a CFA and was rated 'very good' quality. Six studies (Brudek & Steuden, 2017;Eskigülek & Kav, 2021;Ota et al, 2019;Parpa et al, 2017;Ripamonti et al, 2012;Rodríguez-Mayoral et al, 2021) performed both CFA and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and were rated 'very good' quality.…”

Psychometric properties of the Short Form-8 Health Survey (SF-8) among diabetes and non-diabetes Iranian older people

“…Ceiling and floor effects are considered to be present if >20% of the respondents report the lowest or highest possible total scores, respectively. 19 …”