IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i17-18p3414-3424.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development and psychometric evaluation of a Chinese version of auditory hallucination risk assessment scale in patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia

Author

Listed:
  • Xingxing Wang
  • Wenwen Qi
  • Sally Chan
  • Zhongying Shi

Abstract

Aims and objectives To develop a Chinese version of Auditory Hallucination Risk Assessment Scale and evaluate its psychometric properties. Background Auditory hallucination, a common symptom in schizophrenia, has the potential to cause harm to patients and the people around them. However, there has been a paucity of suitable instrument developed in Asian region that can comprehensively and reliably assess its risk and inform interventions. Design This study involved 2 stages, the development of the Auditory Hallucination Risk Assessment Scale (AHRAS) and testing the psychometric properties of AHRAS. We followed STROBE guidelines in reporting the study. Methods Auditory Hallucination Risk Assessment Scale items were developed based on Symptom Management Theory, systematic literature review and findings of a qualitative study on the experience of auditory hallucinations. The items were evaluated by content validity. Auditory Hallucination Risk Assessment Scale was then tested for construct validity, concurrent validity, predictive validity, internal consistency and test–retest reliability in a convenience sample of 156 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Results The final version of AHRAS has nine items. Two factors were extracted from AHRAS, which explained 57.74% of the total variance. The score of AHRAS was strongly correlated with that of the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales‐Auditory Hallucinations. The area under the curve was 0.90 for the overall AHRAS score. Sensitivity (86.5%) and specificity (80.0%) were maximal for a mean overall AHRAS score of 13.5, suggesting that this is an appropriate threshold for differentiation. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for internal consistency was 0.82, and intra‐class correlation coefficient for test–retest reliability was 0.84. Conclusions Auditory Hallucination Risk Assessment Scale has good reliability and validity. It can be used in clinical settings in China and beyond to assess the risk of auditory hallucinations. Relevance to clinical practice Auditory Hallucination Risk Assessment Scale can serve as a tool for nurses and other healthcare professionals to identify patients with high‐risk auditory hallucinations, monitor the changes of risk and inform nursing interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Xingxing Wang & Wenwen Qi & Sally Chan & Zhongying Shi, 2020. "Development and psychometric evaluation of a Chinese version of auditory hallucination risk assessment scale in patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(17-18), pages 3414-3424, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:17-18:p:3414-3424
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15379
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15379?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yu Zhu & Yu‐can Zhan & Ji‐Min Zhu & Li Huang & Ling Zhang & Miao Zhang & Bai‐Kun Li, 2019. "The development and psychometric validation of a Chinese empathy motivation scale," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(13-14), pages 2599-2612, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yu Jingxian, 2022. "Analysis of Incentive Optimization Measures for Nurses in Public Hospitals in China," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 16(1), pages 192-210.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:17-18:p:3414-3424. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.