Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25870519›Full record

ArticlePatient related outcome measures2015

Pragmatic measurement of health satisfaction in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus using the Current Health Satisfaction Questionnaire.

Shana B Traina, Hilary H Colwell, Ross D Crosby, Susan D Mathias

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Measure to Assess Emotional Impact of Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. The Determinants of Living with Long-Term Conditions: An International Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Shana B TrainaJanssen Global Services, LLC, Raritan, NJ, USA.
Hilary H ColwellHealth Outcomes Solutions, Winter Park, FL, USA.
Ross D CrosbyHealth Outcomes Solutions, Winter Park, FL, USA ; Neuropsychiatric Research Institute and University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Fargo, ND, USA.
Susan D MathiasHealth Outcomes Solutions, Winter Park, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe concept of diabetes-related health satisfaction encompasses issues specifically related to living with diabetes (eg, blood glucose, blood pressure levels, body weight). Health satisfaction is more specific than overall health-related quality of life because it considers disease-related factors, and is different from diabetes treatment satisfaction because it addresses issues not specifically related to treatment. Low levels of health satisfaction in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) may negatively affect self-care behaviors and treatment outcomes; however, there are currently no instruments available to assess health satisfaction in this population. This study assessed the measurement properties of a newly constructed, 14-item Current Health Satisfaction Questionnaire (CHES-Q) designed to assess diabetes-related health satisfaction and knowledge of the disease and important laboratory results.

methodsIn-depth interviews were conducted in 23 adults with T2DM to confirm the content and clarity of the CHES-Q. The revised instrument was administered to 1,015 individuals with T2DM, along with supplemental questionnaires, including the Short Form-36. All subjects completed the questionnaires again 3 to 7 days later. CHES-Q test-retest reliability, construct validity, and known-groups validity were evaluated.

resultsIn general, respondents found the CHES-Q to be clear and comprehensive. Test-retest reliability was generally acceptable for all items (≥0.70), except for three that fell just below the widely accepted cut-point of 0.70 (range 0.63-0.69). Convergent and divergent validity was demonstrated based on hypothesized correlations with the Short Form-36. Known-groups validity was confirmed for most CHES-Q items when respondents were split into groups known to differ clinically by body mass index, disease severity, or glycated hemoglobin.

conclusionHealth satisfaction is a unique and important concept to consider when developing individualized strategies for managing T2DM because health satisfaction is a key element of patient-centered care. The CHES-Q allows for the pragmatic assessment of many aspects of diabetes-related health satisfaction in a single questionnaire.

Indexed as

Current Health Satisfaction Questionnairediabeteshealth satisfactionpatient-reported outcomesreliabilityvalidity

Identifiers

PMID25870519
PMCPMC4381897

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.