Dataset Information

Development and validation of a scale to measure diabetes burnout.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The aim of this study is to establish reliability and validity of the Diabetes Burnout Scale (DBS) among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

Methods

We used a multi-stage, mixed methods approach to developing the DBS. First, the research team identified twenty-eight candidate items through a review of the literature and 117 qualitative narratives from adults living with T1D. Next, items were revised based on the expert (n = 20) and individual with T1D (n = 10) feedback. The resulting 18-item DBS measure along with validated measures of diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, and questions related to diabetes outcomes (i.e., last reported hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] and Time-in-Range [TiR]) were completed by 1099 adults with T1D across the U.S. The sample was randomly divided into two subsets (n1 = 561, n2 = 538) for exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA/CFA) to determine the underlying structure of the DBS. Regression analyses examined the relationships of the DBS with self-reported glycemic control and socio-demographic characteristics.

Results

Based on the EFA three factors are identified and the DBS demonstrated strong internal consistency with Cronbach alphas (≥0.80). The validation and confirmatory analysis for the structure of the DBS provided consistent results with EFA. Higher burnout (overall DBS) was positively associated with diabetes distress (b = 0.74; p < 0.01) and depressive symptoms (b = 0.61; p < 0.01). Overall DBS, however was the strongest predictor for poorer HbA1c (r2 = 0.19; p < 0.01) and lower TiR (r2 = 0.17; p < 0.01) compared to diabetes distress and depressive symptoms.

Conclusion

The 12-item DBS is a reliable and valid scale to measure diabetes burnout in adults with diabetes. The results provide a weak to strong degree of association between the validated DBS scale, T1-DDS and PHQ-8. The DBS can contribute to advancement of diabetes science by measuring diabetes burnout and informing clinical interventions to improve psychosocial care in individuals with diabetes.

SUBMITTER: Abdoli S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7898165 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development and validation of a scale to measure diabetes burnout.

Abdoli Samereh S Miller-Bains Katherine K Fanti Paulo P Silveira Monica S V M MSVM Hessler Danielle D

Journal of clinical & translational endocrinology 20210211

<h4>Introduction</h4>The aim of this study is to establish reliability and validity of the Diabetes Burnout Scale (DBS) among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).<h4>Methods</h4>We used a multi-stage, mixed methods approach to developing the DBS. First, the research team identified twenty-eight candidate items through a review of the literature and 117 qualitative narratives from adults living with T1D. Next, items were revised based on the expert (n = 20) and individual with T1D (n = 10) feedback ...[more]

PMID: 33665131

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo develop an individual's physical subhealth risk perception scale and evaluate its reliability and validity, so as to provide a measurement tool for individual physical health risk.MethodsA questionnaire on the perception risk of physical subhealth was developed. Using a random sampling method, 785 people in the Anhui provincial physical examination centre were selected as the research participants. Of the questionnaires returned, 770 were valid, giving an effective rate of 98%. Firstly, the Pearson correlation coefficient method was used to study the correlation of 35 items in the initial scale, and then, polychoric factor structure analysis was carried out by using the Pratt D matrix to optimize the item structure. The Cronbach'α coefficient method was used to test the internal consistency reliability, and a structural equation model was used to explore the construct validity of the scale. The discriminant validity of the scale was obtained by factor analysis. A general linear model was used to analyse the relationship between the clinical manifestations of physical subhealth and the level of risk perception, and the convergent validity of the scale was evaluated.ResultsAll the data of 35 items were significantly correlated at the 0.01 level. The correlation coefficients between a1 and a2, a3 and a4, b1 and b2, b2 and b3, c4 and c5, c5 and c6, c6 and c7, c8 and c9, d1 and d2, d2 and d3, e5 and e6, g1 and g2, g2 and g3, and g2 and g4 were greater than 0.6. The items with correlation coefficients greater than 0.6 were reduced by a Pratt D matrix. The resulting physical subhealth risk perception scale covers five factors with a total of 18 items. The Cronbach'α coefficient of the scale was 0.889, and the Cronbach'α coefficients of the five factors F1-F5 were 0.780, 0.825, 0.801, 0.736, and 0.704, respectively. Structural equation model analysis showed that χ 2/df = 3.43, p < 0.001, RMSEA = 0.08, GFI = 0.88, NFI = 0.84, AGFI = 0.84, and CFI = 0.88. Factor analysis showed that factors F1-F5 had significant correlations (p < 0.01), and the correlation coefficients were less than the corresponding square root value of AVE. Based on the subhealth clinical manifestations of the participants, the general linear model was used to explore the convergent validity of the scale, and the results indicated that the scale passed the convergent validity test.ConclusionsWe propose a physical subhealth risk perception scale amounting to 18 items, which includes five dimensions: health knowledge (2 items), risk perception (5 items), trust selection (4 items), information channel (4 items), and social groups (3 items). The reliability and validity of the physical subhealth risk perception scale are acceptable. Applying the scale into practice has potential to improve the overall public health level.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to develop and validate a tailored patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) evaluating the patient experience of recurrent urinary tract infection (rUTI) symptom severity. This measure was designed to supplement clinical testing methods, allowing full assessment of the patient experience of rUTI symptom burden, while enhancing patient-centred UTI management and monitoring.Subjects and methodsThe Recurrent Urinary Tract Infection Symptom Scale (RUTISS) was developed and validated using a three-stage methodology, in accordance with gold-standard recommendations. Firstly, a two-round Delphi study was conducted to gain insights from 15 international expert clinicians working in rUTI, developing an initial pool of novel questionnaire items, assessing content validity and making item refinements. Next, two phases of one-to-one semi-structured cognitive interviews were conducted with a diverse sample of 28 people experiencing rUTI to assess questionnaire comprehensiveness and comprehensibility, making refinements after each phase. Finally, a comprehensive pilot of the RUTISS was conducted with 240 people experiencing rUTI across 24 countries, providing data for psychometric testing and item reduction.ResultsExploratory factor analysis indicated a four-factor structure comprising: 'urinary pain and discomfort', 'urinary urgency', 'bodily sensations' and 'urinary presentation', together accounting for 75.4% of the total variance in data. Qualitative feedback from expert clinicians and patients indicated strong content validity for items, which was supported by high content validity indices in the Delphi study (I-CVI > 0.75). Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the RUTISS subscales were excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.87-0.94 and ICC = 0.73-0.82, respectively), and construct validity was strong (Spearman's ρ = 0.60-0.82).ConclusionThe RUTISS is a 28-item questionnaire with excellent reliability and validity, which dynamically assesses patient-reported rUTI symptoms and pain. This new PROM offers a unique opportunity to critically inform and strategically enhance the quality of rUTI management, patient-clinician interactions, and shared-decision making by monitoring key patient-reported outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundResponsiveness of physicians is the social actions that physicians do to meet the legitimate expectations of service seekers. Since there is no such scale, this study aimed at developing one for measuring responsiveness of physicians in rural Bangladesh, by structured observation method.MethodsData were collected from Khulna division of Bangladesh, through structured observation of 393 patient-consultations with physicians. The structured observation tool consisted of 64 items, with four Likert type response categories, each anchored with a defined scenario. Inter-rater reliability was assessed by same three raters observing 30 consultations. Data were analyzed by exploratory factor analysis (EFA), followed by assessment of internal consistency by ordinal alpha coefficient, inter-rater reliability by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), concurrent validity by correlating responsiveness score with waiting time, and known group validity by comparing public and private sector physicians.ResultsAfter removing items with more than 50% missing values, 45 items were considered for EFA. Parallel analysis suggested a 5-factor model. Nine items were removed from the list owing to < 0.50 communality, <0.32 loading in un-rotated matrix, and <0.30 on any factor in rotated matrix. Since 34 items (i.e., the number of remaining items after removing nine items by EFA) were loaded neatly under five factors, explained 61.38% of common variance, and demonstrated high internal consistency with coefficient of 0.91, this was adopted as the Responsiveness of Physicians Scale (ROP-Scale). The five factors were named as 1) Friendliness, 2) Respecting, 3) Informing and guiding, 4) Gaining trust, and 5) Financial sensitivity. Inter-rater reliability was high, with an ICC of 0.64 for individual rater's reliability and 0.84 for average reliability scores. Positive correlation with waiting time (0.51), and higher score of private sector by 0.18 point denote concurrent, and known group validity, respectively.ConclusionsThe ROP-Scale consists of 34 items grouped under five factors. One can apply this with confidence in comparable settings, as this scale demonstrated high internal consistency and inter-rater reliability. More research is needed to test this scale in other settings and with other types of providers.

Dataset Information

Development and validation of a scale to measure diabetes burnout.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Development and validation of a scale to measure diabetes burnout.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets