ArticleClinical rheumatology2022
Validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease scale in rheumatoid arthritis patients.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Self-efficacy in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: associated factors, profiles and patient-reported outcomes.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Psychometric properties of the self-efficacy scale for chronic disease management (SEMCD-S) in older Colombian adults.BMC psychology · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesRheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune inflammatory condition that causing disability and affection of patient's quality of life (QoL). Self-efficacy investigation helps us to detect the requirements of chronically affected patients and evaluation of self-care management programs. The aim of our study was to test validity and reliability of Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease (SEMCD-Arabic) in RA patients.
methodThis study included 248 RA patients, carried out at Rheumatology and Rehabilitation Department. The SEMCD-Arabic Validity was assessed by correlating the SEMCD-Arabic scale with the validated Arabic version of the modified Health Assessment Questionnaire HAQ (MHAQ), the Arabic version of the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) scale, and the Arabic version of Short Form 36 version 2 for quality of life (SF QoL). Internal consistency, test-retest reliability was assessed.
resultsConvergent validity was confirmed by a positive correlation between (physical, mental) component of SF QoL and SEMCD-Arabic (r = 0.918, r = 0.925) respectively, and negative correlation between MAF and SEMCD-Arabic (r = - 0.657) and MHAQ with SEMCD-Arabic (r = - 0.595). Discriminant validity confirmed by a significant negative correlation between visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, disease activity scale (DAS28), Morning stiffness, patient health, physician health, age, duration, and SEMCD-Arabic (r = - 0.1-0.7) (P < 0.001). Test-retest reliability was estimated which revealed a high interclass correlation coefficient (ICC = 0.87-0.997) indicating excellent agreement and internal consistency is acceptable as the Cronbach's alpha value (0.660 to 0.78).
conclusionThe SEMCD-Arabic questionnaire can be used as a valid and reliable measure for assessment of patient's self-efficacy in RA. Key Points • The SEMCD-Arabic questionnaire has a statistically significant validity in correlation with different clinical manifestations MHAQ, SF QoL, and MAF. • The Arabic SEMCD is highly reliable with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.660 to 0.78.
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.