IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v7y2017i2p2158244017705936.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of the Dutch Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory in Patients With Medical Illness

Author

Listed:
  • Fieke Z. Bruggeman-Everts
  • Marije. L. Van der Lee
  • Elisabeth F. M. Van ‘t Hooft
  • Ivan NyklÃ­Ä ek

Abstract

Most validation studies of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI) involved healthy subjects. Validation in patients who suffer from a life-threatening medical illness is needed, to investigate the FMI’s validity in medical psychology research and practice. Psychometric properties of the Dutch FMI were examined in two patient groups of two different studies: (Sample 1) cardiac patients ( n = 114, M age = 56 ± 7 years, 18% women) and (Sample 2) severely fatigued cancer survivors ( n = 158, M age = 50 ± 10 years, 77% women). Confirmatory factor analysis (studied only in Sample 2) provided good fit for the two-factor solution (Acceptance and Presence), while the one-factor solution provided suboptimal fit indices. Internal consistency was good for the whole scale in both samples (Sample 1 α = .827 and Sample 2 α = .851). The two-factor model showed acceptable to good internal consistency in Sample 2 (Presence: α = .823; Acceptance α = .744), but poor to acceptable in Sample 1 (Presence subscale: α = .577, Acceptance subscale: α = .791). Clinical sensitivity was supported in both samples, and construct validity (studied only in Sample 1) was acceptable. The Dutch FMI is an acceptable instrument to measure mindfulness in patients who experienced a life-threatening illness in a Dutch-speaking population.

Suggested Citation

  • Fieke Z. Bruggeman-Everts & Marije. L. Van der Lee & Elisabeth F. M. Van ‘t Hooft & Ivan NyklÃ­Ä ek, 2017. "Validation of the Dutch Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory in Patients With Medical Illness," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:2:p:2158244017705936
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244017705936
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244017705936
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244017705936?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
    ---><---

    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:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:2:p:2158244017705936. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.