Literature DB >> 22540936

Generic and diabetes-specific well-being in the AT.LANTUS Follow-on study: further psychometric validation of the W-BQ28 indicates its utility in research and clinical practice in Type 2 diabetes in the UK.

J Speight1, L A Khagram, M J Davies.   

Abstract

AIMS: To undertake further psychometric validation of the W-BQ28 to determine its suitability for use in adults with Type 2 diabetes in the UK using data from the AT.LANTUS follow-on study.
METHODS: A total of 353 people with Type 2 diabetes participated in the AT.LANTUS Follow-on study, completing measures of well-being (W-BQ28), treatment satisfaction (DTSQ) and self-care (SCI-R). Confirmatory factor analyses was used to confirm the W-BQ28 structure and internal consistency reliability was assessed. Additional statistical tests were conducted to explore convergent, divergent and known-groups validity. Minimal important differences were calculated using distribution and anchor-based techniques.
RESULTS: Structure of the W-BQ28 (seven four-item subscales plus 16-item generic and 12-item diabetes-specific scales) was confirmed (comparative fit index = 0.917, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.057). Internal consistency reliability was satisfactory (four-item subscales: alpha = 0.73-0.90; 12/16-item scales: α = 0.84-0.90). Convergent validity was supported by expected moderate to high correlations (r(s) = 0.35-0.67) between all W-BQ28 subscales (except Energy); divergent validity was supported by expected low to moderate correlations with treatment satisfaction (r(s) = -0.03-0.52) and self-care (r(s) = 0.02-0.22). Known-groups validity was supported with statistically significant differences by sex, age and HbA(1c) for expected subscales. Minimal important differences were established (range 0.14-2.90).
CONCLUSIONS: The W-BQ28 is a valid and reliable measure of generic and diabetes-specific well-being in Type 2 diabetes in the UK. Confirmation of the utility of W-BQ28 (including establishment of minimal important differences) means that its use is indicated in research and clinical practice.
© 2012 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2012 Diabetes UK.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22540936     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03702.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabet Med        ISSN: 0742-3071            Impact factor:   4.359


  3 in total

Review 1.  Measuring the Quality of Life in Diabetic Patients: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Lorenzo Palamenghi; Milvia Marta Carlucci; Guendalina Graffigna
Journal:  J Diabetes Res       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 4.011

2.  Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Priscilla Jia Ling Wee; Yu Heng Kwan; Dionne Hui Fang Loh; Jie Kie Phang; Troy H Puar; Truls Østbye; Julian Thumboo; Sungwon Yoon; Lian Leng Low
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-08-13       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 3.  Patient-reported outcome measures for assessing health-related quality of life in people with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review.

Authors:  Marlous Langendoen-Gort; Lenka Groeneveld; Cecilia A C Prinsen; Joline W Beulens; Petra J M Elders; Ilana Halperin; Geetha Mukerji; Caroline B Terwee; Femke Rutters
Journal:  Rev Endocr Metab Disord       Date:  2022-07-02       Impact factor: 9.306

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.