Deepening the understanding of the structural validity of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator

被引:0
|
作者
Balasch-Bernat, Merce [1 ,2 ]
Sentandreu-Mano, Trinidad [1 ,3 ]
Tomas, Jose M. [3 ,4 ]
Cebria I Iranzo, Maria A. A. [1 ,2 ,5 ]
Tortosa-Chulia, Maria A. [6 ,7 ]
Arnal-Gomez, Anna [1 ,2 ]
Cezon-Serrano, Natalia [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Valencia, Dept Physiotherapy, C Gasco Oliag 5, Valencia 46010, Spain
[2] Univ Valencia, Dept Physiotherapy, Physiotherapy Mot Multispecial Res Grp PTinMOTION, Valencia 46010, Spain
[3] Univ Valencia, Adv Res Methods Appl Qual Life Promot ARMAQoL, Valencia 46010, Spain
[4] Univ Valencia, Dept Methodol Behav Sci, Valencia 46010, Spain
[5] La Fe Hlth Res Inst IISLAFE, La Fe Hosp Valencia, Phys Med & Rehabil Serv, Valencia 46026, Spain
[6] Univ Valencia, Dept Appl Econ, Valencia 46022, Spain
[7] Univ Valencia, Fac Econ, Dept Appl Econ, Publ Econ Evaluat Res Grp EVALPUB, Valencia 46022, Spain
关键词
Frailty; Older adults; Psychometrics; Structural validity; PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES; VERSION; RELIABILITY; TRANSLATION; TFI;
D O I
10.1007/s40520-023-02407-w
中图分类号
R592 [老年病学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 100203 ;
摘要
BackgroundPsychometric properties of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) have shown low internal consistency for psychological and social domains, and evidence for its structure validity is controversial. Moreover, research on TFI is frequently limited to community dwellings.AimsTo evaluate structural validity, reliability, and convergent and divergent validity of the Spanish version of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) in both community-dwelling and institutionalized older people.Materials and methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted on Spanish older adults (n = 457) recruited from both community settings (n = 322) and nursing homes (n = 135). Participants completed the TFI and other frailty instruments: Fried's Frailty Phenotype, Edmonton Frailty Scale, FRAIL Scale, and Kihon Checklist (KCL). Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), and reliability and validity coefficients were estimated.Results and discussionSome items from physical and social domains showed low factor loadings (< 0.40). The three-factor CFA model showed better fit indices after depurating these items. Reliability estimates were good (CRI >= 0.70) for physical and psychological domains in the institutionalized sample, while in the community dwellings, only physical domain reliability was adequate. Convergent and divergent validity of physical and psychological domains was good, except for some alternative psychological measures highly correlating with the TFI physical component (KCL-depressive mood and Edmonton mood). However, the social domain showed low correlations with some social indicators.ConclusionThe findings of this study clarify some of the controversial validation results of the TFI structure and provide evidence to improve its use in psychometric terms.
引用
收藏
页码:1263 / 1271
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Deepening the understanding of the structural validity of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator
    Mercè Balasch-Bernat
    Trinidad Sentandreu-Mañó
    José M. Tomás
    Maria A. Cebrià i Iranzo
    Maria A. Tortosa-Chuliá
    Anna Arnal-Gómez
    Natalia Cezón-Serrano
    Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 2023, 35 : 1263 - 1271
  • [2] The construct validity of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator
    Robbert, Gobbens
    Marcel van, Assen
    Katrien, Luijkx
    Ria, Wijnen-Sponselee
    Jos, Schols
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2010, 19 : 147 - 147
  • [3] Assessing Frailty with the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI): A Review of Reliability and Validity
    Gobbens, Robbert J.
    Uchmanowicz, Izabella
    CLINICAL INTERVENTIONS IN AGING, 2021, 16 : 863 - 875
  • [4] The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI): New Evidence for Its Validity
    Gobbens, Robbert J. J.
    Boersma, Petra
    Uchmanowicz, Izabella
    Santiago, Livia Maria
    CLINICAL INTERVENTIONS IN AGING, 2020, 15 : 265 - 274
  • [5] VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE POLISH VERSION OF THE TILBURG FRAILTY INDICATOR (TFI)
    Uchmanowicz, I.
    Jankowska-Polanska, B.
    Uchmanowicz, B.
    Kowalczuk, K.
    Gobbens, R. J. J.
    JOURNAL OF FRAILTY & AGING, 2016, 5 (01): : 27 - 32
  • [6] THE TURKISH ADAPTATION OF THE TILBURG FRAILTY INDICATOR: A VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY
    Arslan, Mehmet
    Meltem Koc, Esra
    Sozmen, Melih Kaan
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF GERIATRICS-TURK GERIATRI DERGISI, 2018, 21 (02): : 173 - 183
  • [7] Reliability and Validity of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator in 5 European Countries
    Zhang, Xuxi
    Tan, Siok Swan
    Bilajac, Lovorka
    Alhambra-Borras, Tamara
    Garces-Ferrer, Jorge
    Verma, Arpana
    Koppelaar, Elin
    Markaki, Athina
    Mattace-Raso, Francesco
    Franse, Carmen Betsy
    Raat, Hein
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION, 2020, 21 (06) : 772 - +
  • [8] The Tilburg Frailty Indicator: Psychometric Properties
    Gobbens, Robbert J. J.
    van Assen, Marcel A. L. M.
    Luijkx, Katrien G.
    Wijnen-Sponselee, Maria Th.
    Schols, Jos M. G. A.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION, 2010, 11 (05) : 344 - 355
  • [9] Turkish version of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator
    Topcu, Yildiray
    Tufan, Fatih
    Kilic, Cihan
    CLINICAL INTERVENTIONS IN AGING, 2019, 14 : 615 - 620
  • [10] The Tilburg Frailty Indicator: A psychometric systematic review
    Zamora-Sanchez, Juan-Jose
    Urpi-Fernandez, Ana-Maria
    Sastre-Rus, Meritxell
    Lumillo-Gutierrez, Iris
    Gea-Caballero, Vicente
    Jodar-Fernandez, Lina
    Julian-Rochina, Ivan
    Zabaleta-del-Olmo, Edurne
    AGEING RESEARCH REVIEWS, 2022, 76