4.6 Review

Systematic review of the psychometric properties and theoretical grounding of instruments evaluating self-care in people with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

期刊

JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING
卷 70, 期 6, 页码 1209-1227

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jan.12298

关键词

systematic review; self-care; psychometrics; nursing assessment; patient education; type 2 diabetes

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim To determine the psychometric properties and theoretical grounding of instruments that evaluate self-care behaviour or barriers in people with type 2 diabetes. Background There are many instruments designed to evaluate self-care behaviour or barriers in this population, but knowledge about their psychometric validation processes is lacking. Design Systematic review. Data sources We conducted a search for psychometric or validation studies published between January 1990-December 2012. We carried out searches in Pubmed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuolid, BibliPRO and Google SCHOLAR to identify instruments that evaluated self-care behaviours or barriers to diabetes self-care. Review methods We conducted a systematic review with the following inclusion criteria: Psychometric or clinimetric validation studies that included patients with type 2 diabetes (exclusively or partially) and which analysed self-care behaviour or barriers to self-care and proxies like self-efficacy or empowerment, from a multidimensional approach. Language: Spanish or English. Two authors independently assessedthe quality of the studies and extracted data using Terwee's proposed criteria: psychometrics properties, dimensionality, theoretical ground and population used for validation through each included instrument. Results Sixteen instruments achieved the inclusion criteria for the review. We detected important methodological flaws in many of the selected instruments. Only the Self-management Profile for Type 2 Diabetes and Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale met half of Terwee's quality criteria. Conclusion There are no instruments for identifying self-care behaviours or barriers elaborated with a strong validation process. Further research should be carried out to provide patients, clinicians and researchers with valid and reliable instruments that are methodologically solid and theoretically grounded.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据