Jessica L Browne1,2, Adriana D Ventura3,2, Kylie Mosely2,4, Jane Speight3,2,5. 1. School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia jbrowne@acbrd.org.au. 2. The Australian Centre for Behavioural Research in Diabetes, Diabetes Victoria, Melbourne, Australia. 3. School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. 4. School of Psychology, Australian Catholic University, Sydney, Australia. 5. AHP Research, Hornchurch, U.K.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a self-report measure of perceived and experienced stigma for use with adults with type 2 diabetes: the Type 2 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale (DSAS-2). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: An item pool was drafted based on qualitative data from 25 adults with type 2 diabetes and content from other health-related stigma questionnaires. Thirteen adults with type 2 diabetes completed 57 draft diabetes stigma items and participated in cognitive debriefing interviews. Based on participant feedback, the pool was reduced to 48 items with a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). A total of 1,064 adults with type 2 diabetes completed a survey including these 48 items and other validated measures. Data were subject to principal components analysis and Spearman ρ correlations. RESULTS: The scale was reduced to 19 items, with an unforced three-factor solution indicative of three subscales: Treated Differently (6 items, α = 0.88), Blame and Judgment (7 items, α = 0.90), and Self-stigma (6 items, α = 0.90). A forced one-factor solution supported the calculation of a total score (α = 0.95). Satisfactory concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity were demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: The 19-item DSAS-2 is a reliable and valid measure of type 2 diabetes stigma. A rigorous design and validation process has resulted in a relatively brief measure of perceived and experienced stigma in type 2 diabetes. The novel scale has satisfactory psychometric properties and is now available to facilitate much-needed research in this field.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a self-report measure of perceived and experienced stigma for use with adults with type 2 diabetes: the Type 2 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale (DSAS-2). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: An item pool was drafted based on qualitative data from 25 adults with type 2 diabetes and content from other health-related stigma questionnaires. Thirteen adults with type 2 diabetes completed 57 draft diabetes stigma items and participated in cognitive debriefing interviews. Based on participant feedback, the pool was reduced to 48 items with a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). A total of 1,064 adults with type 2 diabetes completed a survey including these 48 items and other validated measures. Data were subject to principal components analysis and Spearman ρ correlations. RESULTS: The scale was reduced to 19 items, with an unforced three-factor solution indicative of three subscales: Treated Differently (6 items, α = 0.88), Blame and Judgment (7 items, α = 0.90), and Self-stigma (6 items, α = 0.90). A forced one-factor solution supported the calculation of a total score (α = 0.95). Satisfactory concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity were demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: The 19-item DSAS-2 is a reliable and valid measure of type 2 diabetes stigma. A rigorous design and validation process has resulted in a relatively brief measure of perceived and experienced stigma in type 2 diabetes. The novel scale has satisfactory psychometric properties and is now available to facilitate much-needed research in this field.
Authors: Deborah A Greenwood; Michelle L Litchman; Ashley H Ng; Perry M Gee; Heather M Young; Mila Ferrer; Jimmy Ferrer; Chris E Memering; Barbara Eichorst; Renza Scibilia; Lisa M S Miller Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2019-01-07
Authors: Ebele M Umeukeje; Marcus G Wild; Saugar Maripuri; Teresa Davidson; Margaret Rutherford; Khaled Abdel-Kader; Julia Lewis; Consuelo H Wilkins; Kerri Cavanaugh Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-03-15 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Jessica L Browne; Elizabeth Holmes-Truscott; Adriana D Ventura; Christel Hendrieckx; Frans Pouwer; Jane Speight Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-02-28 Impact factor: 2.692