| Literature DB >> 29319739 |
Gisele de Lacerda Chaves Vieira1, Adriana Silvino Pagano2, Ilka Afonso Reis3, Júlia Santos Nunes Rodrigues4, Heloísa de Carvalho Torres5.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: to perform the translation, adaptation and validation of the Diabetes Attitudes Scale - third version instrument into Brazilian Portuguese.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29319739 PMCID: PMC5768205 DOI: 10.1590/1518-8345.1404.2875
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rev Lat Am Enfermagem ISSN: 0104-1169
Absolute and relative frequencies of the responses of the Committee of Judges in the evaluation of the instrument items and content validity index. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, 2015
| Item | Requires complete retranslation | Requires partial retranslation with many changes | Requires partial retranslation with a few changes | Does not require retranslation | CVI* |
| N (%)† | |||||
| Instructions | 0 | 5 (8.9) | 20 (35.7) | 31 (55.4) | 0.91 |
| Response options | 1 (1.8) | 1 (1.8) | 19 (33.9) | 35 (62.5) | 0.96 |
| 1 | 0 | 2 (11.1) | 9 (50.0) | 7 (38.9) | 0.89 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 8 (44.4) | 10 (55.6) | 1,00 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 8 (44.4) | 10 (55.6) | 1,00 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 (16.7) | 15 (88.3) | 1.00 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 6 (33.3) | 12 (66.7) | 1.00 |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 6 (33.3) | 12 (66.7) | 1.00 |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 (5.6) | 17 (94.4) | 1.00 |
| 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 (5.6) | 17 (94.4) | 1.00 |
| 9 | 0 | 1 (5.6) | 4 (22.2) | 13 (72.2) | 0.94 |
| 10 | 0 | 0 | 9 (50.0) | 9 (50.0) | 1.00 |
| 11 | 0 | 0 | 11 (61.1) | 7 (38.9) | 1.00 |
| 12 | 0 | 0 | 8 (40.0) | 12 (60.0) | 1.00 |
| 13 | 0 | 3 (15.0) | 5 (25.0) | 12 (60.0) | 0.85 |
| 14 | 1 (5.0) | 1 (5.0) | 11 (55.0) | 7 (35.0) | 0.90 |
| 15 | 0 | 2 (10.0) | 9 (45.0) | 9 (45.0) | 0.90 |
| 16 | 7 (35.0) | 2 (10.0) | 4 (20.0) | 7 (35.0) | 0.55 |
| 17 | 0 | 0 | 7 (35.0) | 13 (65.0) | 1.00 |
| 18 | 1 (5.0) | 0 | 5 (25.0) | 14 (70.0) | 0.95 |
| 19 | 0 | 0 | 7 (35.0) | 13 (65.0) | 1.00 |
| 20 | 0 | 1 (5.0) | 3 (15.0) | 16 (80.0) | 0.95 |
| 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 (100.0) | 1.00 |
| 22 | 0 | 1 (5.0) | 4 (20.0) | 15 (75.0) | 0.95 |
| 23 | 1 (5.0) | 3 (15.0) | 4 (20.0) | 12 (60.0) | 0.80 |
| 24 | 0 | 3 (16.7) | 11 (61.1) | 4 (22.2) | 0.83 |
| 25 | 0 | 0 | 3 (16.7) | 15 (83.3) | 1.00 |
| 26 | 0 | 0 | 4 (22.2) | 14 (77.8) | 1.00 |
| 27 | 1 (5.6) | 3 (16.7) | 10 (55.6) | 4 (22.2) | 0.78 |
| 28 | 0 | 0 | 7 (38.9) | 11 (61.1) | 1.00 |
| 29 | 0 | 2 (11.1) | 7 (38.9) | 9 (50.0) | 0.89 |
| 30 | 0 | 0 | 12 (66.7) | 6 (33.3) | 1.00 |
| 31 | 0 | 1 (5.6) | 9 (50.0) | 8 (44.4) | 0.94 |
| 32 | 0 | 0 | 6 (33.3) | 12 (66.7) | 1.00 |
| 33 | 0 | 0 | 1 (5.6) | 17 (94.4) | 1.00 |
| Mean CVI (SD) | 0.94 (0.09) | ||||
*CVI - content validity index; †The relative frequencies sum to 100% within the lines and absolute frequencies correspond to the number of evaluator Judges for each group of statements of the instrument, with 18 of them assessing questions 1 to 11; 20 judges assessing questions 12 to 23; and 18 judges assessing questions 24 to 33. All the judges reviewed the instructions and instrument response options.
Figure 1Description of items from the original version of the Diabetes Attitudes Scale - third version and the Brazilian version of the Escala de Atitudes dos Profissionais em relação ao Diabetes Mellitus, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, 2015
Characterization of the professionals that participated in the validation stage of the EAP-DM. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, 2016 (n=120)
| Profile of the participants | n (%)* | |
| Gender | ||
| Female | 103 (85.8) | |
| Male | 17 (14.2) | |
| Area of qualification | ||
| Nursing | 64 (53.3) | |
| Medicine | 35 (29.2) | |
| Nutrition | 12 (10.0) | |
| Physiotherapy | 4 (3.3) | |
| Physical Education | 3 (2.5) | |
| Pharmacy | 1 (0.83) | |
| Psychology | 1 (0.83) | |
| Level of practice | ||
| Primary | 40 (33.3) | |
| Secondary | 18 (15.0) | |
| Tertiary | 15 (12.5) | |
| Primary and Secondary | 14 (11.7) | |
| Primary and Tertiary | 9 (7.5) | |
| Level of practice | ||
| Secondary and Tertiary | 15 (12.5) | |
| Primary, Secondary and Tertiary | 9 (7.5) | |
| Qualification | ||
| Master’s degree | 41 (34.2) | |
| Doctoral degree | 33 (27.5) | |
| Specialization | 32 (26.7) | |
| Bachelors degree | 14 (11.7) | |
| Sector of practice | ||
| Public | 69 (57.5) | |
| Private | 10 (8.3) | |
| Public and private | 41 (34.2) | |
| Region of the country | ||
| Southeast | 83 (69.2) | |
| Central-east | 15 (12.5) | |
| South | 12 (10.0) | |
| Northeast | 10 (8.3) | |
| Years of experience - Median (min-max) | 8.0 (1.0-45.0) | |
* n (%): Absolute and relative frequencies
Correlation between the responses to the items, between the scores in the subscale and total score in the test and retest and Cronbach’s alpha Coefficient (α) for the Escala de Avaliação das Atitudes dos Profissionais em relação ao Diabete s (EAP-DM). Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, 2016 (n=120)
| Subscale and items | Polychoric Correlation Coefficient - test and retest | Cronbach’s alpha for the subscales and overall scale | Percentage of concordance between the responses in the test and retest |
| Needs for professional training | 0.987 | 0.57 | |
| Question 1 | 0.813 | 97.5 | |
| Question 6 | - 0.894 | 97.5 | |
| Question 10 | 0.768 | 95.0 | |
| Question 17 | 0.731 | 87.5 | |
| Question 20 | 0.778 | 94.2 | |
| Seriousness of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus | 0.919 | 0.54 | |
| Question 2 | 0.811 | 72.5 | |
| Question 7 | 0.708 | 91.2 | |
| Question 11 | 0.593 | 91.6 | |
| Question 15 | 0.517 | 89.2 | |
| Question 21 | 0.682 | 67.5 | |
| Question 25 | 0.686 | 74.2 | |
| Question 31 | 0.678 | 83.3 | |
| Importance of strict glucose control | 0.900 | 0.55 | |
| Question 3† | --- | 99.2 | |
| Question 8 | 0.623 | 88.3 | |
| Question 12 | 0.763 | 78.3 | |
| Question 16 | 0.679 | 69.2 | |
| Question 23 | 0.674 | 94.2 | |
| Question 26 | 0.800 | 74.2 | |
| Question 28 | 0.631 | 91.6 | |
| Psychosocial impact of diabetes | 0.912 | 0.58 | |
| Question 4 | 0.794 | 82.0 | |
| Question 13 | 0.466 | 92.5 | |
| Question 18 | 0.692 | 70.0 | |
| Question 22 | 0.618 | 56.6 | |
| Question 29 | 0.521 | 65.8 | |
| Question 33† | --- | 99.2 | |
| Importance of autonomy | 0.891 | 0.58 | |
| Question 5 | 0.642 | 69.2 | |
| Question 9 | 0.587 | 95.8 | |
| Question 14 | 0.659 | 61.6 | |
| Question 19 | 0.565 | 75.8 | |
| Question 24 | 0.574 | 82.5 | |
| Question 27 | 0.443 | 70.0 | |
| Question 30 | 0.653 | 66.6 | |
| Question 32 | 0.752 | 65.8 | |
| Overall score | 0.860 | 0.60* |
*Overall alpha; † The responses to the question do not show variability in at least one of the moments, with the calculation of the correlation coefficient not being possible
Intra-class correlation coefficient for the overall scale and its subscales. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, 2016 (n=120)
| Overall scale and subscales | Intra-class correlation coefficient (95%) |
| Needs for professional training | 0.54 (0.40-0.66) |
| Seriousness of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus | 0.67 (0.56-0.76) |
| Importance of strict glucose control | 0.58 (0.45-0.69) |
| Psychosocial impact of diabetes | 0.68 (0.57-0.76) |
| Importance of autonomy | 0.67 (0.56-0.76) |
| General scale | 0.65 (0.54-0.75) |