ArticleThe Diabetes educator2020
Evaluating the Validity of the Risk Perception Survey for Developing Diabetes Scale in a Safety-Net Clinic Population of English and Spanish Speakers.
Article in The Diabetes educator, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effects of Personalized Feedback About ALDH2*2, Alcohol Use, and Associated Health Risks on Drinking Intention and Consumption: The Role of Self-Efficacy and Perceived Threat.Alcohol, clinical & experimental research · 2026Trial
- Diabetes prevention in the Caribbean using lifestyle intervention and Metformin escalation (LIME): results from a quasi-experimental study.BMC public health · 2025Trial
- The impact of genetic counseling on parental risk perception and prevention strategy utilization for type 2 diabetes in at-risk children.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Evaluating the effectiveness of lifestyle education for individuals at increased risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases (Halt2Diabetes): protocol for a repeated measures study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Diabetes Risk Perception in Women with a Recent History of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Secondary Analysis from a Belgian Randomized Controlled Trial (MELINDA Study).Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Risk Perception for Developing Cardiometabolic Disease Among Women Diagnosed with Preeclampsia and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Health Beliefs Associated With Metformin Use Among Insured Adults With Prediabetes.Diabetes care · 2022Article
- Domains from the health belief model predict enrollment in the National Diabetes Prevention Program among insured adults with prediabetes.Journal of diabetes and its complications · 2022Article
- Patient and Provider Prediabetes Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors in a Large Urban Family Medicine Practice.American journal of lifestyle medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study is to examine the factor structure of the Risk Perception Survey for Developing Diabetes (RPS-DD) and test for factorial invariance by language (English, Spanish) and gender (males, females) in a clinically engaged, racially diverse, low-education population.
methodsAdult patients seen in a safety-net health system (N = 641) answered an interviewer-administered survey via telephone in their preferred language (English: 42%, Spanish: 58%). Three constructs in the RPS-DD were assessed-personal control (2 items for internal control and 2 for external control), optimistic bias (2 items), and worry (2 items). Single and multigroup confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were performed using maximum-likelihood estimation to determine the factor structure and test for invariance.
resultsContrary to previous psychometric analyses in white, educated populations, CFAs supported a 4-factor measurement model with internal and external control items loading onto separate factors. The 4-factor structure was equivalent between males and females. However, the structure varied by language, with the worry subscale items loading more strongly for English than Spanish speakers.
conclusionsThe RPS-DD can be used to investigate group differences across gender and language and to help understand if interventions have differential effects for subgroups at high risk for diabetes. Given the increasing prevalence of diabetes among Spanish speakers, researchers should continue to examine the psychometric properties of the RPS-DD, particularly the worry subscale, to improve its validity and clinical utility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.