The ACL-Return to Sport after Injury scale (ACL-RSI) measures athletes’ emotions, confidence in performance, and risk appraisal in relation to return to sport after ACL reconstruction. Aim of this study was to study the validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the ACL-RSI (ACL-RSI (NL)).
Total 150 patients, who were 3–16 months postoperative, completed the ACL-RSI(NL) and 5 other questionnaires regarding psychological readiness to return to sports, knee-specific physical functioning, kinesiophobia, and health-specific locus of control. Construct validity of the ACL-RSI(NL) was determined with factor analysis and by exploring 10 hypotheses regarding correlations between ACL-RSI(NL) and the other questionnaires. For test–retest reliability, 107 patients (5–16 months postoperative) completed the ACL-RSI(NL) again 2 weeks after the first administration. Cronbach’s alpha, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), SEM, and SDC, were calculated. Bland–Altman analysis was conducted to assess bias between test and retest.
Nine hypotheses (90%) were confirmed, indicating good construct validity. The ACL-RSI(NL) showed good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.94) and test–retest reliability (ICC 0.93). SEM was 5.5 and SDC was 15. A significant bias of 3.2 points between test and retest was found.
Therefore, the ACL-RSI(NL) can be used to investigate psychological factors relevant to returning to sport after ACL reconstruction. 相似文献
This real‐data‐guided simulation study systematically evaluated the decision accuracy of complex decision rules combining multiple tests within different realistic curricula. Specifically, complex decision rules combining conjunctive aspects and compensatory aspects were evaluated. A conjunctive aspect requires a minimum level of performance, whereas a compensatory aspect requires an average level of performance. Simulations were performed to obtain students' true and observed score distributions and to manipulate several factors relevant to a higher education curriculum in practice. The results showed that the decision accuracy depends on the conjunctive (required minimum grade) and compensatory (required grade point average) aspects and their combination. Overall, within a complex compensatory decision rule the false negative rate is lower and the false positive rate higher compared to a conjunctive decision rule. For a conjunctive decision rule the reverse is true. Which rule is more accurate also depends on the average test reliability, average test correlation, and the number of reexaminations. This comparison highlights the importance of evaluating decision accuracy in high‐stake decisions, considering both the specific rule as well as the selected measures. 相似文献