medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-5057 (Print)
Investigación en Educación Médica

2022, Number 42

<< Back Next >>

Inv Ed Med 2022; 11 (42)

Adaptation and validation of an instrument to assess negative stereotypes of old age

González-Salas IC, Juárez-Hernández LG, Gámez-Mier CH

Language: Spanish
References: 61
Page: 65-77
PDF size: 565.87 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: The assessment for identification of negative stereotypes are numerous for older people, most of the time they are from other regions and are applied without carrying out an adaptation and validation process.
Objective: was to adapt the instrument cuestionario de estereotipos negativos hacia la vejez (CENVE) (translation: questionnaire of negative stereotypes for older people) as applied to mexican medical students.
Method: To adapt it we reviewed the terminology and grammatical details of the items, after which the instrument was reviewed by five experts to determine its relevance and appropriateness of each of the items. Once completed this process, the instrument was submitted to the judgment of eleven experts to analyze its content validity. Finally, to evaluate the instrument’s suitability for the target group, the instrument was piloted with thirtyfour medical students.
Results: The experts supported the relevance and appropriateness of the items, and we incorporated their suggestions improving the final drafting using terms and we incorporated their suggestions improving the final drafting using terms such as social participation, free time, and recreational activities. In the experts’ judgment, all items were validated in content (Aiken’s V ›0,75; LV ›0,50). The pilot’s group perception in regard to understanding the instructions and items was excellent. The reliability of this application was favorable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0,847; IC at 95%: 0,760 ± 0,913).
Conclusions: Adaptation of an instrument to evaluate negative stereotypes towards for old age for the mexican context is shown, with through the validation process was found to have content validity.


REFERENCES

  1. Organización Mundial de la Salud. Las actitudes negativas acerca del envejecimiento y la discriminación contra las personas mayores pueden afectar su salud. [Internet]. Región de las Américas. Ginebra: OMS; 2016. [citado 2021 Ago 21]. Disponible en: https://www.who.int/es/newsroom/ detail/29-09-2016-discrimination-and-negativeattitudes- about-ageing-are-bad-for-your-health

  2. Donizzetti AR. Ageism in an Aging Society: The Role of Knowledge, Anxiety about Aging, and Stereotypes in Young People and Adults. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(8):1329. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16081329

  3. Moreno A. Viejismo (Ageism). Percepciones de la población acerca de la tercera edad: estereotipos, actitudes e implicaciones sociales. Poiesis. 2010;19:2-10.

  4. Organización Mundial de la Salud. Maltrato de las personas mayores. [Internet]. Ginebra: OMS; 2021. [citado 2021 Ago 21]. Disponible en: https://www.who.int/es/newsroom/ fact-sheets/detail/elder-abuse

  5. Allen J. Ageism as a Risk Factor for Chronic Disease. Geront. 2016;56(4):610-14. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnu158

  6. Jackson SE, Hackett RA, Steptoe A. Associations between age discrimination and health and wellbeing: cross-sectional and prospective analysis of the English longitudinal Study of Ageing. Lancet Public Health. 2019;4(4):e200-e8. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30035-0

  7. Faudzi FNM, Armitage CJ, Bryant C, Brown LJE. Moderating effects of age on relationships between attitudes to aging and well-being outcomes. Aging Ment Health. 2020;17:1-7. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2019.1619167

  8. INEGI. Una de cada 5 personas de 18 años y más declaró haber sido discriminada en el último año: Encuesta Nacional sobre Discriminación (ENADIS) 2017. Comunicado de Prensa INEGI Comunicación Social; 2018. Disponible en: https://www.inegi.org.mx/contenidos/saladeprensa/ boletines/2018/EstSociodemo/ENADIS2017_08.pdf

  9. Hawley LC, Norman GJ, Agha Z. Aging Expectations and Attitudes: Associatios With Types of Older Adult Contact. Res Aging. 2019;41(6):523-48. doi: 10.1177/0164027518824291

  10. Fassier T, Valour E, Colin C, Danet F. Who Am I to Decide Whether This Person Is to Die Today? Physicians’ Lifeor- Death Decisions for Elderly Critically III Patients at the Emergency Department-ICU Interface: A Qualitative Study. Ann Emerg Med. 2016;68(1):28-39. doi: 10.1016/j. annemergmed.2015.09.030

  11. Higashi RT, Tillack AA, Steinman M, Harper M, Johnston CB. Elder care as “frustrating” and “boring”: Understanding the persistence of negative attitudes toward older patients among physicians-in-training. J Aging Stud. 2012; 26(4):476-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2012.06.007

  12. Franco M, Villarreal E, Vargas ER, Martínez L, Galicia L. Estereotipos negativos de la vejez en personal de salud de un Hospital de la Ciudad de Querétaro, México. Rev Méd Chile. 2010;1(138):988-93. doi: 10.4067/S0034- 98872010000800007

  13. Castellano Fuentes CL, De Miguel Negredo A. Estereotipos viejistas en ancianos: actualización de la estructura factorial y propiedades psicométricas de dos cuestionarios pioneros. Int J Psychol Psychol Ther. 2010;10(2):259-278.

  14. Levy BR, Kasl SV, Gill TM. Image of aging scale. Percept Mot Skills, 2004;99:208-10. doi: 10.2466/pms.99.1.208-210

  15. Gómez-Moreno C, Veduzco-Aguirre H, Contreras-Garduño S, Perez-de-Acha A, Alcalde-Castro J, Chavarri-Guerra Y, et al. Perceptions of aging and ageism among Mexican physicians-in-training. Clin Transl Oncol. 2019;21(12): 1730-35. doi: 10.1007/s12094-019-02107-w

  16. Sarkisian CA, Hays RD, Berry SH, Mangione CM. Expectations Regarding Aging Among Older Adults and Physicians Who Care for Older Adults. Med Care. 2001;39(9):1025-36. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200109000-00012

  17. Sarkisian CA, Steers WN, Hays RD, Berry, Mangione CM. Development of the 12-Item Expectations Regarding Aging Survey. Gerontologist. 2005;45(2):240-48. doi: 10.1093/ geront/45.2.240

  18. Ayalon L, Dolberg P, Mikulioniené S, Perek-Bialas J, Rapoliené G, Stypinska J, et al. A systematic review of existing ageism scales. Ageing Res Rev. 2019;54(11):1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2019.100919

  19. Henríquez F, Retamal N, Silva F, Morales C. Actitudes hacia el envejecimiento por parte de los estudiantes de Fonoaudiología de una Universidad Chilena. CoDAS. 2019; 32(1):1-7. doi: 10.1590/2317-1782/20192019010

  20. Furunes T, Mykletun RJ. Age discrimination in the workplace: Validation of the Nordic Age Discrimination Scale (NADS). Scand J Psychol. 2010;51:23-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00738.x

  21. Carral P, Alcover CM. Measuring Age Discrimination at Work: Spanish Adaptation and Preliminary Validation of the Nordic Age Discrimination Scale (NADS). Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(8):E1431. doi: 10.3390/ ijerph16081431

  22. Blanca Mena MJ, Sánchez-Palacios C, Trianes MV. Cuestionario de evaluación de estereotipos negativos hacia la vejez. Rev Mult Gerontol. 2005;15(4):212-20.

  23. Real Academia Española RAE. Diccionario de la Real Academia Española. Madrid, España; 2014. Disponible en: https://dle.rae.es/cascarrabias?m=form

  24. Arnold M. Think Pink The Story of Depatie-Freleng. [Inter- net]. Estados Unidos: BearManor Media; 2015. Disponible en: https://cutt.ly/OEd94zN

  25. Guijarro Alonso JL. Los humoristas y la caricatura nueva. Metamorfosis de un arte global: Madrid 1898-1936 [Tesis doctoral]. [Madrid, España]: Universidad Complutense de Madrid; 2017.

  26. Carvajal A, Centeno C, Watson R, Martínez M, Sanz Rubiales A. ¿Cómo validar un instrumento de medida de la salud? Anales Sist San Navarra. 2011;34(1):63-72.

  27. Argimon J, Jiménez J. Métodos de investigación clínica y epidemiológica. Madrid, España: Elsevier; 2013.

  28. Ato M, López J, Benavente A. Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anal Psicol. 2013;29(3):1038-59. doi: 10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511

  29. Ruiz C. Instrumentos de Investigación Educativa. Procedimientos para su Diseño y Validación. Venezuela: Tipografía y Litografía Horizontes, C.A.; 2002.

  30. Juárez-Hernández LG, Tobón S. Análisis de los elementos implícitos en la validación de contenido de un instrumento de investigación. Revista Espacios. 2018;39(51):23-30.

  31. Connell J, Carlton J, Grundy A, Taylor Buck E, Keetharuth AD, Ricketts T, et al. The importance of content and face validity in instrument development: Lessons learnt from service users when developing the Recovering Quality of Life measure. Qual Life Res. 2018;27:1893-1902. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1847-y

  32. CIFE. Planeación del diseño y validación de un instrumento de investigación. Cuernavaca, Morelos, México: Centro Universitario CIFE; 2018. Disponible en: https:// cife.edu.mx/recursos/

  33. Aiken L. Content validity and reliability of single items or questionnaires. Educ Psychol Measur. 1980;40(4):955-59. doi: 10.1177/001316448004000419

  34. Penfield RD, Giacobbi PR. Applying a score confidence interval to Aiken’s item content-relevance index. Measure Phys Educ Exerc Science. 2004;8(4):213-25. doi: 10.1207/ s15327841mpee0804_3

  35. Bulger SM, Housner LD. Modified Delphi Investigation of Exercise Science in Physical Education Teacher Education. J Teach Phys Educ. 2007;26(1):57-80. doi: 10.1123/ jtpe.26.1.57

  36. Merino-Soto C, Livia-Segovia J. Intervalos de confianza asimétricos para el índice la validez de contenido: Un Programa Visual Basic para la V de Aiken. Ann Psychol. 2009;25(1):169-71.

  37. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994;6(4):284-90. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284

  38. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of test. Psychom. 1951;16(3):297-334.

  39. Charter RA. A breakdown of reliability coefficients by test type and reliability method, and clinical implications of low reliability. J Gen Psychol. 2003;130(3):290-304. doi: 10.1080/00221300309601160

  40. Konin AJ, Franses HB. Confidence Intervals for Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha Values. ERIM. [Internet]. 2003. [Consultado 2021 Jul 17]. Disponible en: repub.eur.nl/pub/431/

  41. Butler RN. Age-Ism: Another Form of Bigotry. Gerontologist. 1969;9(4):243-246. doi: 10.1093/geront/9.4_part_1.243

  42. Organización de los Estados Americanos. Convención Interamericana sobre la Protección de los Derechos Humanos de las Personas Mayores (A-70). Washington, D.C., OEA; 2022. [citado 2022 Ene 6]. Disponible en: https://www.oas.org/es/ sla/ddi/tratados_multilaterales_interamericanos_A-70_derechos_ humanos_personas_mayores.asp

  43. Giraldo Rodríguez L. Estereotipos y discriminación a las personas adultas mayores. En: Gutiérrez Robledo LM, Giraldo Rodríguez L. Coord. Los mexicanos vistos por sí mismos. Los grandes temas nacionales. Realidades y expectativas frente a la nueva vejez. Encuesta Nacional sobre Envejecimiento. México: UNAM; 2015. p. 53-74.

  44. Chrisler JC, Barney A, Palatino B. Ageism can be Hazardous to Women’s Health: Ageism, Sexism, and Stereotypes of Older Women in the Healthcare System. J Soc Issues. 2016;72(1):86-104. doi: 10.1111/josi.12157

  45. Dobrowolska B, Jędrzejkiewicz B, Pilewska-Kozak A, Zarzycka D, Ślusarska B, Deluga A, et al. Age discrimination in healthcare institutions perceived by seniors and students. Nurs Ethics. 2019:26(2):443-59. doi: 10.1177/0969733017718392

  46. Fernando P, Arora A, Crome P. Combating age discrimination: A United Kingdom perspective. Eur Geriatr Med. 2011;2(5):263-69. doi: 10.1016/j.eurger.2011.05.001

  47. Meiboom AA, de Vries H, Scheele F, Hertogh CMPM. Raising enthusiasm for the medical care of elderly patients: a concept mapping study to find elements for an elderly friendly medical curriculum. BMC Med Educ.2018;18(1):238. doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1344-6

  48. Giguere A, Farmanova E, Holroyd-Leduc JM, Straus SE, Urquhart R, Carnovale V, et al. (2018). Key stakeholders’views on the quality of care and services available to frail seniors in Canada. BMC Geriatr. 2018;18(1);290:2-14. doi: 10.1186/ s12877-018-0969-y

  49. Masse M, Meire P. L’âgisme, un concept pertinent pour penser les practiques de soins aux personnes âgées? Geriatr Psychol Neuropsychiatr Vieil. 2012;10(3):333-41. doi: 10.1684/pnv.2012.0364

  50. Dubin RE, Kaplan A, Graves L, Ng VK. Reconnaître la stigmatisation: Sa présence dans le soins aux patients et dans la formation médicale. Can Fam Physician. 2017;63(12):913-15.

  51. Portela A. Estereotipos negativos sobre la vejez en estudiantes de Terapia Ocupacional. Rev Argent Ter Ocup. 2016;1:3-13.

  52. Lara-Pérez R, Moreno-Pérez NE, Padilla-Raygoza N. Estereotipos negativos hacia el envejecimiento estudiantes universitarios del área de la salud. Sanus [Internet]. 2018;8:10- 25. doi: 10.36789/sanus.vi8.107

  53. Sireci SG. The construct of content validity. Social Indic Res. 1998;45:83-117. doi: 10.1023/A:1006985528729

  54. Oluwatayo JA. Validity and reliability issues in educational research. JESR. 2012;2(2):391-400.

  55. Mastaglia B, Toye C, Kristjanson LJ. Ensuring content validity in instrument development: Challenges and innovative approaches. Contemp Nurse. 2003;14:281-91. doi: 10.5172/conu.14.3.281

  56. Martín-Arribas MC. Diseño y validación de cuestionarios. Mat Prof. 2004;5(17):23-29.

  57. Koller I, Levenson MR, Glück J. What Do You Think You Are Measuring? A Mixed-Methods Procedure for Assessing the Content Validity of Test Items and Theory-Based Scaling. Front Psychol. 2017;8(126):1-20. doi: 10.3389/ fpsyg.2017.00126

  58. Carrillo Avalos BA, Sánchez Mendiola M, Leenen I. Amenazas a la validez en evaluación: implicaciones en educación médica. Inv Ed Med. 2020;9(34):100-7. doi: 10.22201/ facmed.20075057e.2020.34.221

  59. Menéndez Álvarez-Dardet S, Cuevas-Toro AM, Pérez-Padilla J, Lorence Lara B. Evaluación de los estereotipos negativos hacia la vejez en jóvenes y adultos. Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol. 2016;51:323-328. doi: 10.1016/j.regg.2015.12.003

  60. Nunes C, Menéndez S, Martins C, Martins H. Psychometrics properties the negative stereotypes towards aging questionnaire (CENVE) among a sample of Portuguese adults. Psicol Reflex Crit. 2018;31:2-6. doi: 10.1186/s41155- 018-0085-0

  61. Carpenter S. Ten steps in scale developmental and reporting: Guide for researchers. Commun Meth Meas. 2018;12(1):25- 44. doi: 10.1080/19312458.2017.1396583




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com