Factor Structure of the Bulgarian Version of FOCUS on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/2292-2598.2023.11.05.3Keywords:
FOCUS, factor structure, children, communication skillsAbstract
The aim of this paper is to present the Factor structure of the Bulgarian version of FOCUS on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six. The instrument is based on the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health – Children and Youth (ICF-CY), and it aims at tracing the effect of therapy on the child’s communication and participation in the real world. Our research is focused on the factor structure and reliability of the Parent’s form. The participants formed two samples, the main one consisting of 272 (mostly preschool children), males and females. The age of the subjects varied between 2.17 and 7.25 years, with a mean age of M = 4.91 years and SD = 1.10.
The latent structure of the questionnaire was examined in five phases – 1-test of the assumption of one-dimensionality; 2-exploratory factor analysis was applied to establish the factor model, based on data from an empirical study; 3-three possible factor models with a fixed number of factors were analyzed; 4-the factor models were compared through confirmatory factor analysis. The aim of the analyses was to select the most appropriate final model for the Bulgarian version of the questionnaire. The reliability analysis of the scales in the two-factor model was conducted through testing their internal consistency.
The two-factor model of the FOCUS questionnaire in Bulgarian shows a good orientation towards two specific functions – ‘capacity for communication’, and ‘performance’ or ‘communicative performance’. Due to its stable measurements related to functioning, this tool could be effectively used to practically assess the effect of therapy on children with development disorders.
References
Thomas-Stonell N, Robertson B, Walker J, Oddson B, Washington K, Rosenbaum P. FOCUS©: Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six. Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, Toronto: ON, Canada 2012; ISBN: 978-0-9917332-0-0.
Thomas-Stonell N, Oddson B, Robertson B, Rosenbaum P. Development of the FOCUS (Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six), a communication outcome measure for preschool children. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2010; 52(1): 47-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03410.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03410.x
Thomas-Stonell N, Washington K, Oddson B, Robertson BC, Rosenbaum P. Measuring communicative participation using the FOCUS © : Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six. Child Care Health and Development 2013; 39(4): 474-80. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12049 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12049
Piazzalunga S, Salerni N, Limarzi S, Ticozzell B, Schindler A. Assessment of children’s communicative participation: a preliminary study on the validity and reliability of the Italian Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS-I) in preschool age. Speech, Language and Hearing 2020; 23(3): 167-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/2050571x.2020.1738037 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2050571X.2020.1738037
Neumann S, Salm S, Rietz C, Stenneken P. The German focus on the outcomes of communication under six (FOCUS-G): reliability and validity of a novel assessment of communicative participation. Journal of Speech-Language and Hearing Research 2017; 60(3): 675-81. https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_jslhr-l-15-0219 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_JSLHR-L-15-0219
International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Available from: https://icd.who.int/dev11/l-icf/en
World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health for Children and Youth (ICF-CY). Geneva: WHO 2007.
Sanches-Ferreira M, Simeonsson RJ, Silveira-Maia M, Alves S, Tavares APM, Pinheiro SSC. Portugal’s special education law: implementing the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in policy and practice. Disability and Rehabilitation 2012; 35(10): 868-73. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2012.708816 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2012.708816
Vale MDC, Pereira-Da-Silva L, Pimentel MJ, Marques TN, Rodrigues H, Cunha G, et al. Classifying Functioning of Children and Adolescents with Intellectual Disability: The Utility of the International Classification of Functioning, Dis-ability and Health for Children and Youth. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities 2017; 14(4): 285-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/jppi.12199 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jppi.12199
Simeonsson RJ. ICF-CY: a Universal Tool for Documentation of Disability. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities 2009; 6(2): 70-2. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-1130.2009.00215.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-1130.2009.00215.x
Guichard S, Grande C. Differences between Pre-School Children with and without Special Educational Needs Functioning, Participation, and Environmental Barriers at Home and in Community Settings: An International Classi-fication of Functioning, Disability, and Health for Children and Youth Approach. Frontiers in Education 2018; 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00007
Hellblom-Thibblin T, Klang N, Åman K. Biopsychosocial model and the ICF-CY in in-service training: general educators’ reflections. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities 2012; 58(1): 12-9. https://doi.org/10.1179/2047387711y.0000000003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1179/2047387711Y.0000000003
Washington KT. Using the ICF within speech-language pathology: Application to developmental language impairment. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology 2007; 9(3): 242-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/14417040701261525 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14417040701261525
Sanches-Ferreira M, Santos PLD, Alves S, Silveira-Maia M. The use of the ICF-CY for describing dynamic functioning profiles: outcomes of a teacher training programme applied in Portugal. International Journal of Inclusive Education 2017; 22(7): 734-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1412507 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1412507
Dionissieva K, Stankova M, Boyadzhieva-Deleva E. Bulgaria. In J. Law, C. McKean, C. Murphy & E. Thordardottir (Eds.) Managing Children with Developmental Language Disorder: Theory and Practice Across Europe and Beyond. Routledge & CRC Press 2019; pp. 158-169. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429455308 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429455308-10
Hambleton RK. Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 1994; 10(3): 229-244. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1995-39303-001
Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen MR. Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 2008; 6(1). https://helenagmartins.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/fit-indices.pdf
Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 1999; 6(1): 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Browne MW, Cudeck R. Single sample Cross-Validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1989; 24(4): 445–55. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2404_4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2404_4
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
