IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0142395.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of the Hendrich II Fall Risk Model in a Chinese Hospital Population

Author

Listed:
  • Congcong Zhang
  • Xinjuan Wu
  • Songbai Lin
  • Zhaoxia Jia
  • Jing Cao

Abstract

To translate, validate and examine the reliability and validity of a Chinese version of the Hendrich II Fall risk Model (HFRM) in predicting falls in elderly inpatient. A sample of 989 Chinese elderly inpatients was recruited upon admission at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital. The inpatients were assessed for fall risk using the Chinese version of the HFRM at admission. The reliability of the Chinese version of the HFRM was determined using the internal consistency and test-rested methods. Validity was determined using construct validity and convergent validity. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were created to determine the sensitivity and specificity. The Chinese version of the HFRM showed excellent repeatability with an intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.9950 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.9923–0.9984). The inter-rater reliability was high with an ICC of 0.9950 (95%CI: 0.9923–0.9984). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.366. Content validity was excellent, with a content validity ratio of 0.9333. The Chinese version of the HFRM had a sensitivity of 72% and a specificity of 69% when using a cut-off of 5 points on the scale. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.815 (P

Suggested Citation

  • Congcong Zhang & Xinjuan Wu & Songbai Lin & Zhaoxia Jia & Jing Cao, 2015. "Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of the Hendrich II Fall Risk Model in a Chinese Hospital Population," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-7, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0142395
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142395
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0142395
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0142395&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0142395?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0142395. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.