ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Development and validation of a self-management questionnaire for people living with HIV in low- and middle-income countries (HIV-SM LMIC tool).
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe main objective of this research is to develop and validate a comprehensive self-management tool for PLWH (HIV-SM LMIC tool) in Ethiopia.
methodItem development followed a recommended procedure. Item concepts were based on two previously published articles by the same authors, guided by the Individual Family Self-management (IFSMT) theoretical framework. The developed items were translated from English into Amharic (a local language in Ethiopia). Two rounds of face and content validation were conducted with HIV program experts, academics, people outside the health sector, and HIV patients. A total of 61 participants (52 in the first round and 9 in the second round) participated in the validation process. All participants evaluated the content and face validity of each item and provided qualitative judgments, comments, and suggestions.
resultsIn the first round of validation, most participants were health professionals (53.8%), followed by HIV patients (19.2%) and HIV program experts/researchers (9.6%). Nine participants took part in the second round. Initially, 117 draft items were refined into 63 for validation. I-FVI (individual face validity index) values ranged from 0.56 to 0.98, with 43 items (68%) scoring ≥ 0.80, indicating high face validity. I-CVI (individual content validity index) values ranged from 0.76 to 1.00, with 61 items (97%) scoring ≥ 0.80, demonstrating high content validity. Common qualitative feedback highlighted translation and contextualization issues in the Amharic version and overlapping concepts. Based on FVI, CVI, and qualitative feedback, particularly patient comments, 26 items were dropped or merged, resulting in a 37-item tool. In the second round, 31 items scored above 0.80 on the CVI. Three items were removed due to low CVI (< 0.70) and redundancy, while two were dropped based on participant feedback. The remaining 32 items had kappa values > 0.74, indicating excellent relevance. Both English and Amharic versions were revised.
conclusionA comprehensive 32-item HIV-SM LMIC tool tailored to HIV patients in low- and middle-income countries was developed following a rigorous psychometric evaluation process. Further research on its construct validity, criterion validity and reliability are recommended before its use. In addition, future studies should assess the cross-cultural validity of the final instrument.
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.