Ulla Møller Hansen1,2, Ingrid Willaing3, Adriana D Ventura4,5, Kasper Olesen3, Jane Speight4,5,6, Jessica L Browne4,5. 1. Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Diabetes Management Research, Niels Steensens Vej 6, 2820, Gentofte, Denmark. Ulla.moeller.hansen@regionh.dk. 2. National Institute of Public Health, Univeristy of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark. Ulla.moeller.hansen@regionh.dk. 3. Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Diabetes Management Research, Niels Steensens Vej 6, 2820, Gentofte, Denmark. 4. School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia. 5. The Australian Centre for Behavioural Research in Diabetes, Diabetes Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 6. AHP Research, Hornchurch, Essex, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to (a) culturally and linguistically adapt the Type 1 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale (DSAS-1) from English (for Australia) into Danish and (b) examine psychometric properties of the measure among Danish adults with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We performed a forward-backward translation, face validity interviews with experts and cognitive debriefing of the Danish version (DSAS-1 DK) with ten adults from the target group. The DSAS-1 DK was then completed by 1594 adults with type 1 diabetes. Electronic clinical records provided age, diabetes duration, diabetes-related complications, and glycemic control [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c)]. We examined internal consistency, construct validity and structural validity of the DSAS-1 DK using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in a cross-validation design. RESULTS: The translated measure was found acceptable by the experts and target group, with only minor adaptations required for the Danish context. The DSAS-1 DK structure was best represented by a three-factor model representing the subscales 'Treated Differently,' 'Blame and Judgement,' and 'Identity Concern' (α = 0.88-0.89). The results also provided some support for calculation of a total score (19-item scale; α = 0.75). The subscales and total scale demonstrated satisfactory convergent and discriminant validity. Good structural validity was demonstrated for the three-factor model for four out of five indices [normed χ 2 = 4.257, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.923, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.065, standardized root mean square residual (SRMSR) = 0.0567, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.93]. CONCLUSION: The DSAS-1 DK has a confirmed three-factor structure, consistent with the original Australian English version. The measure is now validated and available to advance research into the stigma perceived and experienced by adults with type 1 diabetes in a Danish context.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to (a) culturally and linguistically adapt the Type 1 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale (DSAS-1) from English (for Australia) into Danish and (b) examine psychometric properties of the measure among Danish adults with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We performed a forward-backward translation, face validity interviews with experts and cognitive debriefing of the Danish version (DSAS-1 DK) with ten adults from the target group. The DSAS-1 DK was then completed by 1594 adults with type 1 diabetes. Electronic clinical records provided age, diabetes duration, diabetes-related complications, and glycemic control [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c)]. We examined internal consistency, construct validity and structural validity of the DSAS-1 DK using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in a cross-validation design. RESULTS: The translated measure was found acceptable by the experts and target group, with only minor adaptations required for the Danish context. The DSAS-1 DK structure was best represented by a three-factor model representing the subscales 'Treated Differently,' 'Blame and Judgement,' and 'Identity Concern' (α = 0.88-0.89). The results also provided some support for calculation of a total score (19-item scale; α = 0.75). The subscales and total scale demonstrated satisfactory convergent and discriminant validity. Good structural validity was demonstrated for the three-factor model for four out of five indices [normed χ 2 = 4.257, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.923, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.065, standardized root mean square residual (SRMSR) = 0.0567, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.93]. CONCLUSION: The DSAS-1 DK has a confirmed three-factor structure, consistent with the original Australian English version. The measure is now validated and available to advance research into the stigma perceived and experienced by adults with type 1 diabetes in a Danish context.
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-08-24 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: A Nicolucci; K Kovacs Burns; R I G Holt; M Comaschi; N Hermanns; H Ishii; A Kokoszka; F Pouwer; S E Skovlund; H Stuckey; I Tarkun; M Vallis; J Wens; M Peyrot Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 4.359
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: Anish P Mahajan; Jennifer N Sayles; Vishal A Patel; Robert H Remien; Sharif R Sawires; Daniel J Ortiz; Greg Szekeres; Thomas J Coates Journal: AIDS Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: David B Sacks; Mark Arnold; George L Bakris; David E Bruns; Andrea Rita Horvath; M Sue Kirkman; Ake Lernmark; Boyd E Metzger; David M Nathan Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Deborah Young-Hyman; Mary de Groot; Felicia Hill-Briggs; Jeffrey S Gonzalez; Korey Hood; Mark Peyrot Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 19.112