PURPOSE: Research shows obesity bias to undermine the patient-doctor relationship and lead to substandard care. The authors developed and tested an instrument to measure medical students' attitudes and beliefs about obese patients. METHOD: The authors conducted a literature search to identify validated measures of obesity bias. Because they identified no appropriate scale, they decided to design a novel survey instrument: the Nutrition, Exercise and Weight Management (NEW) Attitudes Scale. An expert panel generated items which focus groups of third-year medical students then discussed. Next, experienced medical educators judged and weighted the remaining revised items. Then, second- and fourth-year medical students completed the scale alongside two previously validated measures of obesity bias, the Anti-Fat Attitudes Questionnaire (AFA) and Beliefs About Obese Persons Scale (BAOP). Third-year students completed the NEW Attitudes Scale before and after a simulated encounter with an obese standardized patient instructor. The authors tested the validity and reliability. RESULTS: The final instrument comprised 31 items. A sample of 201 judges rated the items. A sample of 111 second- and fourth-year medical students completed the survey (mean score 24.4, range -37 to 76 out of a possible -118 to 118; higher scores indicate more positive attitudes). Pearson correlations between the NEW Attitudes Scale and AFA and BAOP were, respectively, -0.47 and 0.23. Test-retest reliability was 0.89. Students scored 27% higher after completing the standardized patient-instructor encounter (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The NEW Attitudes Scale has good validity and reliability and may be used in future studies.
PURPOSE: Research shows obesity bias to undermine the patient-doctor relationship and lead to substandard care. The authors developed and tested an instrument to measure medical students' attitudes and beliefs about obesepatients. METHOD: The authors conducted a literature search to identify validated measures of obesity bias. Because they identified no appropriate scale, they decided to design a novel survey instrument: the Nutrition, Exercise and Weight Management (NEW) Attitudes Scale. An expert panel generated items which focus groups of third-year medical students then discussed. Next, experienced medical educators judged and weighted the remaining revised items. Then, second- and fourth-year medical students completed the scale alongside two previously validated measures of obesity bias, the Anti-Fat Attitudes Questionnaire (AFA) and Beliefs About ObesePersons Scale (BAOP). Third-year students completed the NEW Attitudes Scale before and after a simulated encounter with an obese standardized patient instructor. The authors tested the validity and reliability. RESULTS: The final instrument comprised 31 items. A sample of 201 judges rated the items. A sample of 111 second- and fourth-year medical students completed the survey (mean score 24.4, range -37 to 76 out of a possible -118 to 118; higher scores indicate more positive attitudes). Pearson correlations between the NEW Attitudes Scale and AFA and BAOP were, respectively, -0.47 and 0.23. Test-retest reliability was 0.89. Students scored 27% higher after completing the standardized patient-instructor encounter (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The NEW Attitudes Scale has good validity and reliability and may be used in future studies.
Authors: David H Roberts; Erin M Kane; Daniel B Jones; Jacqueline M Almeida; Sigall K Bell; Amy R Weinstein; Richard M Schwartzstein Journal: Surg Innov Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 2.058
Authors: Marissa R Mastrocola; Sebastian S Roque; Lauren V Benning; Fatima Cody Stanford Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2019-09-24 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Judith K Ockene; Karen M Ashe; Rashelle B Hayes; Linda C Churchill; Sybil L Crawford; Alan C Geller; Denise Jolicoeur; Barbara C Olendzki; Maria Theresa Basco; Jyothi A Pendharkar; Kristi J Ferguson; Thomas P Guck; Katherine L Margo; Catherine A Okuliar; Monica A Shaw; Taraneh Soleymani; Diane D Stadler; Sarita S Warrier; Lori Pbert Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Sean M Phelan; Diana J Burgess; Rebecca Puhl; Liselotte N Dyrbye; John F Dovidio; Mark Yeazel; Jennifer L Ridgeway; David Nelson; Sylvia Perry; Julia M Przedworski; Sara E Burke; Rachel R Hardeman; Michelle van Ryn Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 5.128