Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3145
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: The Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) is a health-related quality of life instrument used to detect changes in health status following otolaryngologic interventions. Despite its use in cochlear implant literature, assessment of utility, reliability, and validity of GBI in an adult cochlear implants (CI) patient population has yet to be performed.
Study Design: Retrospective case series.
Setting: Academic, tertiary referral center.
Patients: Postlingually deafened, adult CI patients with at least 1 year of device use.
Interventions: Five hundred fifty-two patients were administered GBI questionnaires at least 1 year following CI activation during follow-up visits.
Main Outcome Measures: GBI total and subscale scoring were compared to either the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults or Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly. Moreover, a factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha were performed to determine GBI validity and internal reliability, respectively.
Results: The average overall GBI score was 38.6 ± 21.7. This was weakly correlated to the reduction in Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults/Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (τb = 0.282, p < 0.05). High factor loading with minimal cross-loading was noted on a three-factor solution, which emulated the original GBI development. Internal reliability was acceptable for the general benefit (α = 0.913) and social support subclasses (α = 0.706), whereas physical health's was low (α = 0.643).
Conclusions: Although GBI possesses adequate convergent and discriminant validity with acceptable reliability, its routine use to capture CI-specific health-related changes should not supersede validated CI-specific QoL instruments.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000003292 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!