Development and Evaluation of the Clinical Trial HEalth Knowledge and Beliefs Scale (CHEKS)

Alicia Chung, Tiffany Donley, Ron D. Hays, Rebecca Robbins, Azizi Seixas and Girardin Jean-Louis
Additional contact information
Alicia Chung: Center for Early Childhood Health and Development, Department of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, 227 E. 30th Str., New York, NY 10036, USA
Tiffany Donley: Institute for Excellence in Health Equity, Department of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, 180 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016, USA
Ron D. Hays: UCLA Department of Medicine, 1100 Glendon Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA
Rebecca Robbins: Division of Sleep Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Azizi Seixas: Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA
Girardin Jean-Louis: Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, FL 33136, USA

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 14, 1-15

Abstract: Patient health literacy is vital to clinical trial engagement. Knowledge and beliefs about clinical trials may contribute to patient literacy of clinical trials, influencing engagement, enrollment and retention. We developed and assessed a survey that measures clinical trial health knowledge and beliefs, known as the C linical trial HE alth K nowledge and belief S cale (CHEKS). The 31 survey items in CHEKS represent knowledge and beliefs about clinical trial research ( n = 409) in 2017. We examined item-scale correlations for the 31 items, eliminated items with item-scale correlations less than 0.30, and then estimated internal consistency reliability for the remaining 25 items. We used the comparative fit index (CFI) and the root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA) to evaluate model fit. The average age of the sample was 34 (SD = 15.7) and 48% female. We identified 6 of the 31 items that had item-scale correlations (corrected for overlap) lower than 0.30. Coefficient alpha for the remaining 25 items was 0.93 A one-factor categorical confirmatory factor analytic model with 16 correlated errors was not statistically significant (chi-square = 10011.994, df = 300, p < 0.001) but fit the data well (CFI = 0.95 and RMSEA = 0.07). CHEKS can assess clinical trial knowledge and beliefs.

Keywords: clinical trial measure; assessment; clinical trial knowledge; evaluation; scale development; evaluation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8660/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8660/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8660-:d:864199

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().