메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
Hyun Kyoon Lim (Korea Research Institutes of Standards and Science) Jooyeon Ko (Daegu Health College)
저널정보
대한인간공학회 대한인간공학회지 대한인간공학회지 제37권 제6호
발행연도
2018.12
수록면
733 - 758 (26page)
DOI
10.5143/JESK.2018.37.6.733

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Objective: This study examined the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Cerebral Palsy Quality of Life (CP QOL) questionnaire.
Background: Quality of life (Qol) for the children with cerebral palsy (CP) is also essential aspect of the functioning. However, few Qol assessment tools specific to CP are available in South Korea.
Method: The English version of the Cerebral Palsy Quality of Life (CP-QOL) parent proxy form and the CP-child self-report form was translated into Korean. This study was to verify the reliability and validity of the two Korean versions of the CP-QOL documents. A total of 153 primary caregivers and 61 CP children answered the Korean questionnaires in two sessions two weeks apart. The reliability and validity were analyzed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), Cronbach"s α, and ANOVA.
Results: Cronbach"s α ranged from 0.80 to 0.92 for the Korean version of the CPQOL (K-CP-QOL) parent proxy form and from 0.84 to 0.96 for the child self-report form. All ICCs were above 0.75 except for emotional well-being and pain for the parent proxy form. For the K-CP-QOL child self-report form, all ICCs were 0.75 except for pain. There were significant differences in the feeling about function, emotional well-being, pain, and participation by the CP functional severity.
Conclusion: The K-CP-QOL parent proxy and child self-report forms appear to be valid to use for Korean CP children and their parents.
Application: Korean version of the CP-Qol could be used for both of clinical and research purposes.

목차

1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusion
References

참고문헌 (32)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0