Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32547268›Full record

ArticlePsychology research and behavior management2020

Evaluation of the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ), a Self-Management Skill Assessment Tool, in Italian Chronic Patients.

Andrea Pozza, Richard H Osborne, Gerald R Elsworth, Giacomo Gualtieri, Fabio Ferretti, Anna Coluccia

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology research and behavior management, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Educational Processes for Health and Disease Self-Management in Public Health: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Andrea PozzaDepartment of Medical Sciences, Surgery and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6634-6106
Richard H OsborneCentre for Global Health and Equity, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9081-2699
Gerald R ElsworthCentre for Global Health and Equity, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6306-7593
Giacomo GualtieriLegal Medicine Unit, Santa Maria alle Scotte University Hospital, Siena, Siena, Italy.
Fabio FerrettiDepartment of Medical Sciences, Surgery and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8897-0965
Anna ColucciaDepartment of Medical Sciences, Surgery and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
University of Siena · ITOspedale Santa Maria alle Scotte · ITSwinburne University of Technology · AUUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ) aims to evaluate eight self-management skills in people with chronic conditions. Knowledge about the relations between these self-management skills and different quality of life (QoL) outcomes has received little attention. It is also important to provide further evidence on its properties in non-English healthcare contexts, as the questionnaire is being used in cross-cultural research. Furthermore, in the Italian healthcare context, the relationship between the medical staff and the patients remains asymmetrical, with the latter having the role of passive recipients of medical prescriptions and services. The current study provided further evidence about the psychometric properties of the heiQ among Italian people with chronic conditions, specifically by assessing the factor structure, reliability, convergent/divergent and criterion validity (ie, the specific contribution of each of the self-management skills to QoL outcomes).

methodsTwo hundred ninety-nine individuals with a chronic condition (mean age = 61.4 years, 50% females) completed the heiQ and the Medical Outcomes Study-Short Form (MOS SF-36). Confirmatory factor analyses, Composite Reliability Indices (CRI), bivariate correlations and linear regression analyses were computed.

resultsA model with 8 correlated factors showed good fit, in a similar way to previous studies. CRI values were acceptable to good for all the subscales. Associations between some of the heiQ subscales and some of the MOS SF-36 subscales supported criterion validity. In particular, it was confirmed by the moderate associations between the constructive attitudes and approaches subscale and the MOS SF-36 vitality and perceived mental health and by the moderate correlations between the health directed activities subscale and the MOS SF-36 Vitality. In linear regressions, higher emotional distress predicted higher physical and mental QoL, while higher mental QoL was also associated with stronger constructive attitudes and approaches.

conclusionThe heiQ has robust properties across translations and it can also be used routinely in Italian healthcare contexts. The evidence that all the other self-management skills did not predict either physical or mental QoL could suggest that the self-management model of chronic diseases is still not sufficiently developed in the Italian context, where patients are passive recipients of medical instructions.

Indexed as

cardiovascular diseaseschronic diseasesdiabeteshealth educationhealth statuspsychometric propertiesquality of lifeself-management

Identifiers

PMID32547268
PMCPMC7246315
OpenAlexW3025244715

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.