Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33472648›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2021

Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the LMC Skills, Confidence & Preparedness Index (SCPI) in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Ximin Wang, Weibo Lyu, Ronnie Aronson, Aihua Li, Gendi Lu, Weijin Xu, Yang Cao, Ying Yu, Liting Wang, Huiting Lin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2021. 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
–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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Characterizing Diabetes Empowerment and Motivation for Changing Health Behaviors Among People with Type 2 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2023
    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

10 authors.

Ximin WangSchool of Nursing, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 1200 Cailun Road, Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park, Pudong New Area, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Weibo LyuSchool of Nursing, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 1200 Cailun Road, Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park, Pudong New Area, Shanghai, 201203, China. Lyu_weibo@shutcm.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1276-3817
Ronnie AronsonLMC Diabetes & Endocrinology, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Aihua LiLMC Diabetes & Endocrinology, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Gendi LuShuguang Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Weijin XuShuguang Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yang CaoClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Ying YuSchool of Nursing, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 1200 Cailun Road, Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park, Pudong New Area, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Liting WangSchool of Nursing, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 1200 Cailun Road, Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park, Pudong New Area, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Huiting LinSchool of Nursing, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 1200 Cailun Road, Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park, Pudong New Area, Shanghai, 201203, China.

Funding

Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine 2019HLXK02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA variety of diabetes self-management instruments have been developed but few of them consist of the preparedness for diabetes self-management behavior. The novel psychometric evaluation tool "the LMC Skills, Confidence & Preparedness Index (SCPI)" measures three key aspects of a patient's diabetes self-management: knowledge of the skill, confidence in being able to perform skill and preparedness to implement the skill. The objective of this study was to translate, adapt and validate the SCPI for use in Chinese adult patients with type 2 diabetes.

methodsThis study followed the guideline recommended by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Evidence Based Medicine Committee (AAOS) to indigenize the scale. Forward and back translation, and cross-cultural language debugging were completed according to the recommended steps. A convenience sample of Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 375) were recruited from a university-affiliated hospital in Shanghai. The validity (criterion, discriminant validity, and construct validity), reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability) and the interpretability of the instrument were examined. The content validity was calculated by experts' evaluation.

resultsThe Chinese version of SCPI (C-SCPI) has good internal consistency with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.92. The ceiling effects of the preparedness subscales is 21%. The criterion validity of three dimensions of C-SCPI was established with significantly moderate correlations between the DKT, DES-SF and SDSCA (p < 0.05). The S-CVI of the whole scale was 0.83. Except for entry 21, the I-CVI values of all entries were greater than 0.78. The C-SCPI has also shown good discriminative validity with statistically significant differences between the patients with good and poor glycemic control. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that modified results indicate that the fitting degree of the model is good, χ

conclusionWe established a Chinese version of SCPI through translation and cross-cultural adaptation. The C-SCPI is reliable and valid for assessment of the level of self-management in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes.

Indexed as

AgedChinaDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Factor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSelf-ManagementTranslationsAssessment toolCross-cultural adaptionDiabetesReliabilitySCPISelf-managementTranslationValidity

Identifiers

PMID33472648
PMCPMC7816447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.