OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to update the Diabetes Family Conflict Scale (DFCS) in the era of intensive diabetes management and provide an indication of its psychometric properties. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The revised DFCS and measures of negative emotions around blood glucose monitoring (BGM), quality of life, and perceived parental burden from diabetes management were completed by 202 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes and their primary caregivers. Insulin regimen, adherence, and glycemic control were also assessed. RESULTS: The revised DFCS demonstrated strong psychometric properties. There was acceptable internal consistency for child and caregiver forms of the DFCS. Factor analysis revealed two factors related to direct and indirect management tasks. Both child (r = 0.27, P < 0.01) and caregiver (r = 0.26, P < 0.01) DFCS scores were correlated with A1C values. Multivariate analysis of factors usually associated with A1C values showed an additive, independent contribution of diabetes-specific family conflict to the prediction of glycemic control: F (12,189) = 6.17, P < 0.01, R2 = 0.28. Conflict around direct management tasks (e.g., BGM) was a more important predictor of higher A1C levels than conflict around indirect management tasks (e.g., telling friends about diabetes). CONCLUSIONS: The revised and updated DFCS demonstrates strong psychometric properties and can be used as a tool for measuring the level of diabetes-specific conflict in families with children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to update the Diabetes Family Conflict Scale (DFCS) in the era of intensive diabetes management and provide an indication of its psychometric properties. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The revised DFCS and measures of negative emotions around blood glucose monitoring (BGM), quality of life, and perceived parental burden from diabetes management were completed by 202 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes and their primary caregivers. Insulin regimen, adherence, and glycemic control were also assessed. RESULTS: The revised DFCS demonstrated strong psychometric properties. There was acceptable internal consistency for child and caregiver forms of the DFCS. Factor analysis revealed two factors related to direct and indirect management tasks. Both child (r = 0.27, P < 0.01) and caregiver (r = 0.26, P < 0.01) DFCS scores were correlated with A1C values. Multivariate analysis of factors usually associated with A1C values showed an additive, independent contribution of diabetes-specific family conflict to the prediction of glycemic control: F (12,189) = 6.17, P < 0.01, R2 = 0.28. Conflict around direct management tasks (e.g., BGM) was a more important predictor of higher A1C levels than conflict around indirect management tasks (e.g., telling friends about diabetes). CONCLUSIONS: The revised and updated DFCS demonstrates strong psychometric properties and can be used as a tool for measuring the level of diabetes-specific conflict in families with children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.
Authors: Janet Silverstein; Georgeanna Klingensmith; Kenneth Copeland; Leslie Plotnick; Francine Kaufman; Lori Laffel; Larry Deeb; Margaret Grey; Barbara Anderson; Lea Ann Holzmeister; Nathaniel Clark Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Tim Wysocki; Michael A Harris; Lisa M Buckloh; Deborah Mertlich; Amanda Sobel Lochrie; Alexandra Taylor; Michelle Sadler; Nelly Mauras; Neil H White Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 2006-01-09
Authors: T Danne; H B Mortensen; P Hougaard; H Lynggaard; H J Aanstoot; F Chiarelli; D Daneman; H Dorchy; P Garandeau; S A Greene; H Hoey; R W Holl; E A Kaprio; M Kocova; P Martul; N Matsuura; K J Robertson; E J Schoenle; O Søvik; P G Swift; R M Tsou; M Vanelli; J Aman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Dena Springer; James Dziura; William V Tamborlane; Amy T Steffen; JoAnn H Ahern; Miranda Vincent; Stuart A Weinzimer Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Lori M B Laffel; Laura Vangsness; Alexa Connell; Ann Goebel-Fabbri; Deborah Butler; Barbara J Anderson Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: A M Jacobson; S T Hauser; P Lavori; J B Willett; C F Cole; J I Wolfsdorf; R H Dumont; D Wertlieb Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 1994 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: W H Polonsky; B J Anderson; P A Lohrer; G Welch; A M Jacobson; J E Aponte; C E Schwartz Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 1995-06 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Tonja R Nansel; Barbara J Anderson; Lori M B Laffel; Bruce G Simons-Morton; Jill Weissberg-Benchell; Tim Wysocki; Ronald J Iannotti; Grayson N Holmbeck; Korey K Hood; Amanda S Lochrie Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2008-08-20 Impact factor: 4.866
Authors: Laura J Caccavale; Tonja R Nansel; Virginia Quick; Leah M Lipsky; Lori M B Laffel; Sanjeev N Mehta Journal: J Dev Behav Pediatr Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 2.225
Authors: Kimberly L Savin; Emily R Hamburger; Alexandra D Monzon; Niral J Patel; Katia M Perez; Jadienne H Lord; Sarah S Jaser Journal: J Fam Psychol Date: 2018-02
Authors: Michele Herzer; Neha Godiwala; Kevin A Hommel; Kimberly Driscoll; Monica Mitchell; Lori E Crosby; Carrie Piazza-Waggoner; Meg H Zeller; Avani C Modi Journal: J Dev Behav Pediatr Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.225
Authors: Jennifer M Rohan; Bin Huang; Jennifer Shroff Pendley; Alan Delamater; Lawrence Dolan; Grafton Reeves; Dennis Drotar Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 2015-07-07