ArticlePloS one2022
The development and validation of the awareness and knowledge of diabetes distress questionnaire among doctors in Malaysia.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Instruments for evaluating the quality of services in chronic diseases: scoping review.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2024Article
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
The main objective of this study was to develop and validate the Awareness and Knowledge of Diabetes Distress (AKODD) questionnaire, so that it can be used to assess the knowledge attitude and practice of doctors who treat patients with diabetes distress. This validation study was conducted at the University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from June to July 2019. Doctors from the Departments of Primary Care Medicine, Medicine, Psychological Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Staff Health Unit, who could understand English were recruited, as they treat patients with diabetes or diabetes distress. The AKODD was developed based on literature review. Next, an expert panel met to review findings from literature and to develop the items for AKODD. The AKODD has 3 sections: socio-demographic information, awareness and knowledge. It was then piloted among 7 doctors from the Departments of Primary Care Medicine, Medicine, Psychological Medicine and Emergency Medicine. No problems were encountered. Hence, no changes were made, and the AKODD was administered twice: at 0 and 2 weeks as part of the validation process. Discriminative validity was assessed by comparing scores of doctors who had/had not attended a diabetes course before. A total of 103/119 doctors agreed to participate (response rate = 86.6%). Flesch Reading Ease was 51.1. Thirty-three doctors (32.0%) have heard of diabetes distress before. Doctors had a good level of knowledge regarding diabetes distress with a median score of 77.8% (IQR:66.7-88.9). The AKODD had adequate discriminative validity between participants who had (83.3%)/had not attended a diabetes course before (72.2%; p<0.049). The AKODD had good internal consistency (Kuder-Richardson = 0.931) and adequate reliability as 9/18 items were not statistically significant at test-retest. The AKODD was found to be a valid and reliable questionnaire to assess the awareness and knowledge of diabetes distress among doctors in Malaysia as it had adequate psychometric properties.
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.