Volume 12, Issue 4 (1-2018)                   sija 2018, 12(4): 414-429 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Mohammadi E, Allahyari T, Darvishpoor Kakhaki A, Saraei H. Determining Psychometric Properties of Iranian Active Aging Measurement Instrument. sija. 2018; 12 (4) :414-429
URL: http://salmandj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-1287-en.html
1- PhD Department of Social Work, Faculty of Social Sciences, Allame Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran. , e.mohammadi1986@gmail.com
2- Department of Social Work, Faculty of Social Sciences, Allame Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.
3- Department of Internal Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Tehran, Iran.
4- Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Allame Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran. 
Abstract:   (1448 Views)

Objectives This study aimed at developing and determining psychometric properties of Active Aging Measurement Instrument (AAIM) as per the Iranian aging society.
Methods & Materials This study was performed in two phases by applying the steps identified by Ingersoll-Dayton in 2015-2016. In the first phase, according to prior studies, a preliminary AAMI was developed through three steps. In the second phase through two steps, the psychometric properties of the AAMI were examined. A total of 350 older adults belonging to health-related educational centers in Tehran municipality were included in the psychometrics study using the three-phase cluster sampling method. Statistical tests such as item analysis, exploratory factor analysis, Cronbach's α coefficient, and Pearson correlation coefficient were performed by using SPSS 16.
Results The finding of the first phase was a preliminary 6-item measurement instrument with 5 point responses (none to very much). In the second phase, the result of examining the face and content validity was elimination of 6 items, which led to a 55-item AAMI. The result of psychometric tests after item analysis and factor analysis was the final 40-item AAMI consisting of six factors: 1. social-institutional participation; 2. active mind maintenance; 3. social contacts; 4. agent attitude; 5. productive engagement; and 6. physical-functional activity which explained 56% of the total variance. Reliability of AAMI based on examining Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.88, and also its test-retest reliability was 0.95 (P<0.01).
Conclusion The 40-item AAMI consisting of six factors in the present study not only was shown to be reliable, valid and appropriate for Iranian older adults but was also confirmed to have both subjective and objective dimensions.

Full-Text [PDF 7963 kb]   (762 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (466 Views)  
Type of Study: Research | Subject: gerontology
Received: 2017/07/05 | Accepted: 2017/09/27 | Published: 2018/01/01

References
1. Crampton A. Population ageing and social work practice with older adults: Demographic and policy challenges. International Social Work. 2011; 54(3):313-329. doi: 10.1177/0020872810396257 [DOI:10.1177/0020872810396257]
2. Fernandez-Ballestros E, Robine J, Walker A, Kalache A. Active aging: A global goal. Current Gerontology and Geriatric Research. 2013; 1-4. doi:10.1155/2013/298012 [DOI:10.1155/2013/298012]
3. Paltasingh T, & Tyagi R. Demographic transition and population ageing: Building an inclusive culture. Social Change. 2013; 42(3), 391-409. doi: 10.1177/0049085712454053 [DOI:10.1177/0049085712454053]
4. Joghataei MT, Nejati V. [Assessment of health status of elderly people in the city of Kashan (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Ageing. 2006; 1(1):3-10.
5. Mirzaei M, Shams Ghahfarokhi M. [Demography of elder population in Iran over the period 1956 To 2006 (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Ageing. 2007; 2(3):326-331.
6. Saraie H. [Population window of Iran (Persian)]. Social Development and Welfare Planning. 2010; 1(1):33-45.
7. Saraie H. [Demoghraphy: Basics and principles (Persian)]. Tehran: SAMT; 2010.
8. Buys L, Miller E. The meaning of active aging to older Australian: Exploring the relative importance of health, participation and security. Paper presented at: The 39th Australian Association of Gerontology Conference. 6 August 2006; Sydney, Australia.
9. Mouleart T, Paris M. Social policy on aging: The case of active aging as a theatrical metaphor. International Journal of Social Science Studies. 2013; 1(2):113-123. doi:10.11114/ijsss.v1i2.141. [DOI:10.11114/ijsss.v1i2.141]
10. World Health Organization. Active aging: A policy framework. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2002.
11. Thanakwang K, Isaramalai S, Hattkhakit U. Development and psychometric testing of the active aging scale for Thai adults. Journal of Clinical Interven-tions in Aging. 2014; 1211. doi: 10.2147/cia.s66069 [DOI:10.2147/CIA.S66069]
12. Tareque I, Hoque N, Mahfuza Islam R, Kawahara K, Sugawa M. Relationships between the active aging index and disability free life expectancy: A case study in Rajshahi district of Bangladesh. Canadian Journal of Aging. 2012; 32(4):417-432. doi: 10.1017/S0714980813000494. [DOI:10.1017/S0714980813000494]
13. Zasimova L, Sheluntcova M. Measuring active aging government policy planning: A case of Russia. Moscow: National Research University Higher school of Economics (HSE); 2014.
14. Ziadi A, Gasior K, Hofmarcher M, Lelkes O, Marin B, Rodriques R, et al. Active ageing index, concept, methodology and final results: Project active age-ing index (AAI). Vienna: European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research; 2013. [PMCID]
15. Stromborg M, Olsen S. Instrument for clinical health care. Boston: Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2004.
16. Ingersoll-Dayton B. The development of culturally sensitive measures for research on ageing. Ageing and Society. 2011; 31(3):355-70. doi: 10.1017/S0144686X10000917. [DOI:10.1017/S0144686X10000917]
17. LoBiondo-Wood G, Haber J. Nursing research: Methods, clinical appraisal, and utilization. St.Louis: Mosby; 2013. [PMID] [PMCID]
18. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: Techniquesand procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publica-tions; 1998.
19. Schwandt TA, Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Judging interpretations: but is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. New Direc-tions for Evaluation. 2007; 114:11-25. doi: 10.1002/ev.223 [DOI:10.1002/ev.223]
20. Waltz CF. Nursing research: Design, statistics and computer analysis. Philadelphia: FA Davis Company; 1981.
21. Lawshe C. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personal Psychology. 1975; 28(4):563-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x [DOI:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x]
22. MacCallum R, Widaman K, Zhang S, Hong S. Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods. 1999; 4(1):84-99. doi: 10.1037//1082-989x.4.1.84 [DOI:10.1037//1082-989X.4.1.84]
23. Callaway L, Winkler D, Tippett A, Migliorini C, Herd N, Willer B. The community integration questionnaire-revised (CIQ-R). Melbourne: Summer Foun-dation Ltd; 2014.
24. McColl M, Davies S, Carlson P, Johnston J, Minnes P. The community integration measure (CIM): Development and preliminary validation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2001; 2001; 82(4):429–34. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.22195 [DOI:10.1053/apmr.2001.22195]
25. Van Brakel W, Anderson A, Mutatkar R, Bakirtzeif Z, Nicholls P, Raju M, et al. The participation scale: Measuring a key concept in public health. Journal of Disability and Rehabilitation. 2006; 28(4):193-203. doi: 10.1080/09638280500192785. [DOI:10.1080/09638280500192785]
26. Tate R. Manual for the Sydney psychosocial scale version 2 (SPRS-2). Unpublished manuscript. Sydney: University of Sydney; 2011.
27. Harwood R, Rogers A, Dickinson E, Ebrahim S. Measuring handicap: The London handicap scale, a new outcome measure for chronic disease. Quality and Safety in Health Care. 1994; 3(1):11–6. doi: 10.1136/qshc.3.1.11 [DOI:10.1136/qshc.3.1.11]
28. Soltanmohamadi Y, Hassani Mehraban A, Taghizade G, Akbarfahimi M, Alahyari F. [Validity and reliability of the Persian version of Lawton instrumen-tal activities of daily living scale among patients with dementia (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Ageing. 2014; 9(2):160-167.
29. Stewart A, Mills K, King A, Haskell W, Gillis D, Ritter P. CHAMPS physical activity questionnaire for older adults: Outcome for interventions. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2001; 33(7):1126-41. doi: 10.1097/00005768-200107000-00010 [DOI:10.1097/00005768-200107000-00010]
30. Yasunaga A, Park H, Watanabe E, Togo F, Park S, Shephard R, et al. Development and evaluation of the physical activity questionnaire for elderly Japa-nese: The Nakanojo Study. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity. 2007; 15(4):398-411. doi: 10.1123/japa.15.4.398 [DOI:10.1123/japa.15.4.398]
31. Deng H, Macfarlane D, Thomas C, Lao Z, Jiang C, Cheng K, et al. Reliability and validity of the IPAQ Chinese: The Guangzhou Biobank cohort study. Medicine & Sciences in Sports and Exercise. 2008; 40(2):303-7. doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e31815b0db5. [DOI:10.1249/mss.0b013e31815b0db5]
32. Meyer AM, Evenson R, Morimoto L, Sisocovick D, White E. Test-retest reliability of the women's health initiative physical activity questionnaire. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2009; 41(3):530-538. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31818ace55. [DOI:10.1249/MSS.0b013e31818ace55]
33. Voorips L, Ravelli A, Dongelmans P, Deurenberg P, Van Straveren W. A physical activity questionnaire for the elderly. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 1991; 23(8):974-79. doi: 10.1249/00005768-199108000-00015 [DOI:10.1249/00005768-199108000-00015]
34. Pretson C, Gudisken K. A measure of self perception among older people. Journal of Gerontologist. 1966; 21(1):63-71. doi: 10.1093/geronj/21.1.63 [DOI:10.1093/geronj/21.1.63]
35. Thiamwong L, Stewart A, Warahut J. Development, reliability and validity of Thai healthy aging survey. Walailak Journal of Science and Technology. 2009; 6(2):167-188.
36. Troutman M, Nies M, Small S, Bates A. The development and testing of an instrument to measure successful aging. Research in Gerontological Nursing. 2011; 4(3):221-32. doi: 10.3928/19404921-20110106-02. [DOI:10.3928/19404921-20110106-02]
37. Thanakwang T, Isaramalai S, Hattkhakit U. Thai cultural understandings of active ageing from perspective of older adults: A qualitative study. Pacific Rim International Journal of Nursing Research. 2014; 18(2):152-165.
38. Polit D, Beck C. The content validity index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing and Health. 2006; 29(5):489-497. doi: 10.1002/nur.20147. [DOI:10.1002/nur.20147]
39. Waltz CF, Strickland OL, Lenz ER. Measurement in nursing and health research. Berlin: Springer Publishing; 2005.
40. Kim JH. Productive aging of elderly in Japan. Korean Social Science Journal. 2010; 1:1-26.
41. Morrow-Howell N, Hinterlong J, Sherraden M. Productive aging (concepts and challanges). Baltomore: John Hopkins University Press; 2001. [PMID]
42. Stenner P, McFarquhar T, Bowling A. Older people and active aging: Subjective aspects of aging actively and becoming old. Journal of Health Psychology. 2011; 16(3):467-77. doi: 10.1177/1359105310384298. [DOI:10.1177/1359105310384298]
43. Ferreria OG L, Carnerio Maciel S, Oliveira Silva A, Dos Santos WS, Moreira MAS. Active aging from the perspective of aged individuals who are func-tionally independent. Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP. 2010; 44(4):1065-69. doi: 10.1590/s0080- 62342010000400030.
44. Mohammadi E, Allahyari T, Darvishpoor Kakhki A, Saraei H, Fereshtehnejad SM. Analysis of being active based on community dwelling older adults' experience: Qualitative study of active aging strategies (Persian). Iranian Journal of Ageing. 2017; 11(4):504-17.
45. Mohammadi E. [Understanding active aging and constructing its psychometric instrument (Persian)] [PhD thesis]. Tehran: Allameh Tabataba'i University; 2016.
46. Rafiey H. [Qualitative and quantitative interdisciplinary methods for research on addiction (Persian)]. Tehran: Danjeh Publication; 2008.
47. Burns N, Grove S. The Practice of Nursing Research: conduct, critique & utilization. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2001.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
Write the security code in the box

Send email to the article author


© 2018 All Rights Reserved | Iranian Journal of Ageing

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb