ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
Validity and reliability of the English version of the Diabetic Foot Self-Care Questionnaire: a cross-cultural adaptation.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Measurement Properties of Instruments Used to Assess Diabetic Foot: An Umbrella Review.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Pooled it
- Psychometric Evaluation of the Brazilian Version of the Diabetic Foot Self-Care Questionnaire of the University of Malaga-Spain (DFSQ-UMA-Br).Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The objective of this study was to carry out the cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Diabetic Foot Self-Care Questionnaire into the English language, broadening the applicability of this patient-reported outcome measure and improving the monitoring of patients with diabetic foot disease. Methods: The validation study into English was conducted in two phases: cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation study. Short Form-12 Version 2, EuroQoL-5D and Foot Function Index were used to analyze the criterion validity. Item response, internal consistency, standard error of measurement, minimal detectable change and construct validity were calculated in the validation phase. Results: An English version of the questionnaire (DFSQ-UMA-En) was successfully obtained. A total of Conclusion: DFSQ-UMA-En is a valid and reliable tool with good readability and comprehension features. This questionnaire addresses foot self-care behaviors in patients with diabetic foot disease, standing out as essential for early diagnosis and prevention strategies in clinical and research settings.
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.