Akzeptanz bei Tinnitus: Validierung des „Akzeptanzfragebogen bei chronischem Tinnitus“ (AFCT)
Abstract
Background Tinnitus is a widely spread symptom, which is perceived chronically by approximately 10% of the population. The vast majority of the tinnitus patients doesn´t feel impaired through the ear noise, but about 5-30% of the tinnitus patient are suffering in their everyday life. Whether severe distress is experienced cannot be explained by the quality of the ear noise itself (i. e. loudness or duration). Newer research tends to explain the difference in the experienced strain by the concept of acceptance. The aim of this study was to analyze the psychometric quality of a German Version of the "Chronic Pain Acceptance Ques-tionnaire" (CPAQ), namely the "Akzeptanzfragebogen bei chronischem Tinnitus" (AFCT) which has been adapted for tinnitus. Methods 97 patients with chronic tinnitus have been tested at the start of an outpatient tinnitus group therapy. The following questionnaires were used: "Akzeptanzfragebogen bei chronischem Tinnitus" (AFCT) and "Tinnitusfragebogen" (TF). The structure of the AFCT was determined by a factor analysis. The reliability was evaluated by the estimation of the internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha). Results Due to psychometric weakness and unclear factorial loadings 8 items have been removed. Out of the remaining 12 items the AFCT-12 has been developed. The AFCT-12 consists of 2 factors, which explain a variance of 54.9%. Both AFCT-12 and AFCT have a satisfactory reliability and validity. Conclusion The results demonstrate that the AFCT-12 is…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The CTAQ-G shows clear negative correlations between tinnitus distress and acceptance of chronic tinnitus.
“The convergent validity was assessed with the total score of the German Tinnitus Questionnaire (TQ) and showed clear negative correlations between tinnitus distress and acceptance of chronic tinnitus.[28]”
From The influence of tinnitus acceptance on the quality of life and psychological distress in patients with chronic tinnitus (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
The CTAQ-G has good internal consistency (α = 0.874) and a two-factor solution.
“A good internal consistency (CTAQ-G α = 0.874) was reported and factor analysis revealed a two-factor solution.”
From The influence of tinnitus acceptance on the quality of life and psychological distress in patients with chronic tinnitus (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 3
- Authors
- Riedl, D., Rumpold, G., Schmidt, A., Bliem, H., & Moschen, R.
- Affiliations
- Innsbruck Medical University (AT)
- Universität Innsbruck (AT)
- Department für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Univ.-Klinik für Medizinische Psychologie, Innsbruck, Austria
- ORCID
- Rumpold, G.
- Venue
- Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie
- Publisher
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Published
- 2014-08-06
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 840-847
- ISSN
- 0935-8943 (ISSN-L)
- 1438-8685
- OpenAlex
- W2395528277
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2019: 1 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 0.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- de
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Noise Effects and Management
- Keywords
- chronic tinnitus, acceptance, Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, psychometric validation, questionnaire adaptation, factor structure, internal consistency, tinnitus distress
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Chronic Disease, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Tinnitus, Reproducibility of Results, Treatment Outcome, Cost of Illness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
