ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Development and Validation of the Healthcare-Seeking Intention Questionnaire in Patients with Diabetic High-Risk Foot.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding risk factors and prognosis in diabetic foot ulcers.Open life sciences · 2025Review
- Development and Validation of the Healthcare-Seeking Intention Questionnaire in Patients with Diabetic High-Risk Foot [Letter].Patient preference and adherence · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Timely screening and intervention can prevent the development of the diabetic foot. However, delayed visits to the clinic are common among diabetic foot patients. The study aimed to develop and validate a questionnaire to assess healthcare-seeking behavior among patients with diabetic high-risk foot. Methods: The questionnaire of healthcare-seeking intention for patients with diabetic high-risk foot was developed in two phases: (1) Developing the questionnaire: 1) questionnaire items were formulated after literature review, group discussion and semi-qualitative interview; 2) a two-round modified Delphi method was to examine the content validity and the degree of consistency in questionnaire items; 3) conducting pre-survey to revise the questionnaire items. (2) Assessing the internal reliability and construct validity. Results: The final questionnaire consisted of five main themes and 28 items with a five-point rating. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the five dimensions were respectively 0.937 (relevant knowledge of diabetic foot), 0.669 (attitudes toward seeking care), 0.896 (social support for seeking care), 0.621 (efficacy in coping with foot symptoms), 0.871 (intention to seek care). The Scale-level Content Validity Index of the five parts was 1.00, 0.80, 1.00, 1.00, and 1.00, respectively. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin values for each dimension was greater than 0.7, and the p-value for Bartlett's test of sphericity was less than 0.05. Conclusion: This questionnaire showed good validity, internal consistency, and reliability. It provided a potentially useful instrument to evaluate healthcare-seeking intention among patients with diabetic high-risk foot.
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.