Attitudes of students, parents, and teachers toward glasses use in rural China.

OBJECTIVE:

To use focus groups to understand barriers to glasses use among children in rural China.

METHODS:

Separate focus groups were conducted between December 17, 2007, and August 5, 2008, for the following 3 groups at each of 3 schools in rural China: children aged 14 to 18 years with myopia of less than -0.5 diopters in both eyes, those children's parents, and those children's teachers. Participants were also asked to rank their responses to questions about glasses use. The focus group transcripts were coded independently by 2 investigators using qualitative data management software.

RESULTS:

Respondents of all 3 types indicated that glasses purchase and wear should be delayed in children with early myopia and might be harmful to the eyes. Parents and students reported being uncertain about children's actual myopia status and whether glasses should be worn. Parents ranked their most common reason for not buying glasses as being "too busy with work," whereas "too expensive" ranked low. Inconvenience was ranked as an important reason for not wearing glasses among all 3 student groups. "Accuracy of lens power" was the first-ranked requirement for glasses among all student groups, whereas "new and attractive styles" was ranked last by all. All 3 types of respondents believed that wearing glasses or failing to wear them might worsen myopia.

CONCLUSIONS:

Educational programs are needed to address significant knowledge gaps in families and schools about glasses use in rural China. Cost and the need for attractive styles may not be significant barriers to use in this setting, raising the possibility of paying for such programs through cost recovery.

Abstract: Psychometric properties of two self-report clinical competence scales for nursing students.

Abstract: Psychometric properties of two self-report clinical competence scales for nursing students.
Background: It is important to assess the clinical competence of nursing students to gauge their professional development and educational needs. This can be measured by self-assessment tools. Anema and McCoy (2010) contended that the currently available measures need further psychometric testing.
Aim: To test the psychometric properties of Nursing Competencies Questionnaire (NCQ) and Self-Efficacy in Clinical Performance (SECP) clinical competence scales.

Method: A non-randomly selected sample of n=248 2nd year nursing students completed NCQ, SECP and demographic questionnaires (June and September 2013). Mokken Scaling Analysis (MSA) was used to test the structural validity and scale properties, convergent and discriminant validity and reliability were subsequently tested.

Results: The NCQ provided evidence of a unidimensional scale which had strong scale scalability coefficients Hs =0.581; but limited evidence of item rankability HT =0.367. MSA undertaken with the SECP scale identified two potential unidimensional scales the SECP28 and SECP7, each with adequate evidence of good/reasonable scalablity psychometric properties as a summed scale but no/very limited evidence of scale rankability (SECP28: Hs = 0.55, HT=0.211; SECP7: Hs = 0.61, HT=0.049). Analysis of between cohort differences and NCQ/ SECP scale scores produced evidence of convergent and discriminant validity and good internal reliability: NCQ α = 0.93, SECP28 α = 0.96, and SECP7 α=0.89.

Discussion: The NCQ was verified to have evidence of reliability and validity; however, as the SECP findings are new, and the sample small, with reference to Straat and colleagues (2014), the SECP results should be interpreted with caution and verified on a second sample.

Conclusions: Measurement of perceived self-competence could inform the development of nursing competence and could start early in a nursing programme. Further testing of the NCQ and SECP scales with larger samples and from different years is indicated.


References:
Anema, M., G and McCoy, JK. (2010) Competency-Based Nursing Education: Guide to Achieving Outstanding Learner Outcomes. New York: Springer.
Straat, JH., van der Ark, LA and Sijtsma, K. (2014) Minimum Sample Size Requirements for Mokken Scale Analysis Educational and Psychological Measurement 74 (5), 809-822.