Table 2.
Unadjusted mean scores of PROMIS outcomes, medical communication, and psychosocial variables
| Variables | NHW | High-acculturated Chinese | Low-acculturated Chinese | Cronbach’s alpha | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | NHW | Chinese | |
| Physical function (8 items, Range: 20-62) | 52.62 (7.97) | 54.02 (7.64) | 49.39 (8.13)b,c | .90 | .90 |
| Depression (8 items, range: 37-78) | 46.15 (7.86) | 45.02 (7.49) | 47.50 (9.01) | .90 | .91 |
| Anxiety (7 items, range: 36-83) | 50.87 (8.47) | 48.74 (8.30) | 49.10 (9.70) | .92 | .91 |
| Medical communication (10 items, range 10-40) | 37.32 (4.35) | 35.68 (4.65)a | 32.14 (5.85)b,c | .92 | .89 |
| Perceived control (4 items, range: 4-20) | 12.79 (2.66) | 12.47 (2.94) | 10.95 (3.60)b,c | .68 | .66 |
| Perceived severity (6 items, range: 6-30) | 17.61 (5.43) | 18.50 (5.06) | 18.99 (4.73)b | .81 | .78 |
| Engagement coping¥ (8 items, range 8-32) | 27.01 (3.65) | 26.29 (4.27) | 23.92 (5.18)b,c | .77 | .80 |
| Disengagement coping¥ (6-items, range 6-24) | 7.28 (1.73) | 7.17 (1.59) | 7.84 (2.43)b,c | .54 | .64 |
| Socioeconomic wellbeing (8 items, range: 8-40) | 32.69 (3.78) | 31.38 (4.18) | 23.81 (6.72)b,c | .80 | .89 |
| Social support (9 items, range: 9-45) | 37.18 (6.86) | 35.58 (6.19) | 33.27 (7.37)b,c | .93 | .90 |
| Social network (5 items, rang: 0-35) | 13.32 (6.25) | 11.95 (6.20) | 10.49 (5.93) b | ≠ | ≠ |
Note. Higher mean scores indicate higher physical function, depression, anxiety, communication, perceived severity and control, more engagement and disengagement coping, greater socioeconomic wellbeing, social support, and social network. The total number of people in a patient’s social network was calculated; thus, there was no reliability estimated.
Significantly different between high-acculturated Chinese and NHWs, p<.05
Significantly different between low-acculturated Chinse and NHWs, p<.05
Significantly different between low-acculturated and high-acculturated Chinese, p<.05
A latent factor underlies a subset of coping strategies (see Yang et al., 2008). This two-factor measurement model fit well to the Chinese sample (comparative fit index-CFI=0.94; root mean square residual-RMSEA=0.1), especially for low-acculturated Chinese (CFI=.95 and RMSEA=0.05).