Assessment of long-term sickness absence: content and face validity of a new questionnaire based on qualitative data from nominal groups
| Autor: | Charlotte Vanovenberghe, Kaat Goorts, Lode Godderis, Dorina Rusu, Sofie Vandenbroeck, Marc Du Bois, Charlotte Lambreghts, Eline Bruneel |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male Time Factors Epidemiology Applied psychology Long-term sickness absence Health Informatics Qualitative property 03 medical and health sciences Young Adult 0302 clinical medicine Return to Work Belgium Surveys and Questionnaires Absenteeism Content validity Humans 030212 general & internal medicine Content (Freudian dream analysis) Face validity lcsh:R5-920 Sickness absence Questionnaire Reproducibility of Results Correction Nominal group Focus Groups Middle Aged 030210 environmental & occupational health Term (time) Female Sick Leave lcsh:Medicine (General) Psychology Research Article |
| Zdroj: | BMC Medical Research Methodology BMC Medical Research Methodology, Vol 19, Iss 1, Pp 1-11 (2019) |
| ISSN: | 1471-2288 |
| Popis: | BackgroundIncreasing rates of long-term sickness absence are a worldwide problem. Belgium is the first country in Europe that aims to screen its entire population of sick leavers (sick leave > 6 weeks) for the risk of long-term sickness absence in order to focus resources on the high-risk group and to provide adequate return-to-work support. Our aim was to investigate content and face validity of a newly designed questionnaire (Quickscan) using item prioritization of patients and professionals in the field of long-term sickness absence. This questionnaire was developed based on a review of the literature and existing instruments (Goorts et al, J Public Health Res 7:1419, 2018).MethodsQualitative data were collected using the nominal group technique. The data were gathered exploring factors that influence return-to work restrictions or opportunities.ResultsParticipants indicated 20 out of 21 of the questionnaire factors as important reasons that might influence the return-to-work process. Additionally, 16 factors were discussed that were not yet included in the Quickscan but that might provide useful information on return-to-work issues, according to the participants. In the prioritization of items, we found considerable diversity among participants.ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate the validity of the Quickscan items to ask patients about important return-to-work barriers or opportunities. However, additional factors were identified that may improve the assessment of risk for long-term sickness absence. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink