Advertisement

Diabetes Mellitus Knowledge Test: development, psychometric evaluation, and establishing norms for Indian population

  • Meera Padhy
  • Ruth Angiel Padiri
  • Meena Hariharan
  • Suvashisa RanaEmail author
Original Article
  • 47 Downloads

Abstract

The cornerstone of diabetes management is self-management—a set of skilled behaviors to manage one’s own illness. Education for diabetes self-management is a vital component of overall management. Nevertheless, lack of knowledge concerning the various aspects of diabetes acts as one of the barriers to achieve optimal diabetes control. The objectives of the study were to develop a test to measure the knowledge of symptoms, causes and risk factors, complications, and management of type 2 diabetes and standardize the test initially by establishing the psychometric properties and norms on an Indian clinical sample. This new test named as Diabetes Mellitus Knowledge Test (DMKT) was developed through four phases—item writing, content validation, item analysis and reliability, and establishment of validity and development of norm—involving three clinical samples (n1 = 10, n2 = 212, n3 = 268) basing on cross-sectional survey design. The DMKT consisted of 37 items having dichotomous response category that were distributed under four theoretical dimensions—symptoms (9 items), causes and risk factors (12 items), complications (11 items), and management (5 items). The reliability of the test was found to be .76. The convergent validity and norm were established. The implications and short-comings of the DMKT were discussed.

Keywords

Knowledge of symptoms Knowledge of causes and risk factors Knowledge of complications Knowledge of management Convergent validity Norm 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to Ms. Durgesh Nandinee and Ms. Kavya Chelli for their help. We extend our gratitude to the authorities of the clinics for permitting us to work with their patients. We are also thankful to all the participants for their kind and voluntary participation. Nevertheless, we are grateful to all the authors whose instruments and research findings we have referred while developing this measure and cited in our text.

Compliance with ethical standards

Before starting the study, approval was obtained from the institutional ethics committee.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    International Diabetes Federation. Diabetes Atlas (6th ed.). Brussels: Author. Retrieved from http://www.idf.org/diabetesatlas; 2013.  https://doi.org/10.1177/193229681300700132.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Parry O, Peel E, Douglas M, Lawton J. Issues of cause and control in patient accounts of type 2 diabetes. Health Educ Res. 2006;21:97–107.  https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyh044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sevick MA, Trauth JM, Ling BS, Anderson RT, Piatt GA, Kilbourne AM, et al. Patients with complex chronic diseases: perspectives on supporting self-management. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(3):438–44.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0316-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goodall T, Halford NK. Self management of diabetes mellitus: a critical review. Health Psychol. 1991;10:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.10.1.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mohan V, Venkatraman JV, Pradeepa R. Epidemiology of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes: the Indian scenario. J Diab Sci Technol. 2010;4(1):158–70.  https://doi.org/10.1177/193229681000400121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care for patients with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(1):32–42.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Merriam-Webster’s online Dictionary. (2015). Retrieved March 10, 2015, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/knowledge.
  8. 8.
    Knight K, Badamgarav E, Henning JM, Hasselblad V, Gano AD Jr, Ofman JJ, et al. A systematic review of diabetes disease management programs. Am J Manag Care. 2005;11(4):242–50.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Al-Sarayra AI, Khalidi RS. Awareness and knowledge about diabetes mellitus among students at Al-Ba qa' applied university. Pak J Nutr. 2012;11(11):1023–8. Retrieved from http://www.pjbs.org/pjnonline/.  https://doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2012.1023.1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hawal NP, Kambar S, Patil S, Hiremath MB. Knowledge, attitude and behaviour regarding self-care practices among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients residing in an urban area of South India. Int Multidiscip Res J, 2013 2(12). Retrieved from http://irjs.info/index.php/irjs/index.
  11. 11.
    Fitzgerald JT, Funnell MM, Hess GE, Barr PA, Anderson RM, Hiss RG, et al. The reliability and validity of a brief diabetes knowledge test. Diabetes Care. 1998;21(5):706–10.  https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.21.5.706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Torres HC, Virginia AH, Schall VT. Validation of diabetes mellitus knowledge (DKN-A) and attitude (ATT-19) questionnaires. Revista de SaudePublica. 2005;39(6):906–11.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dunn SM, Bryson JM, Hoskins PL, Alford JB, Handelsman DJ, Turtle JR. Development of the diabetes knowledge (DKN) scales: forms DKNA, DKNB, and DKNC. Diabetes Care. 1984;7(1):36–41.  https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.7.1.36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Collins GS, Mughal S, Barnett AH, Fitzgerald J, Lloyd CE. Modification and validation of the revised diabetes knowledge scale. Diabet Med. 2011;28(3):306–10.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.03190.x.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huizinga MM, Elasy TA, Wallston KA, Cavanaugh K, Davis D, Gregory RP, et al. Development and validation of the diabetes numeracy test (DNT). BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Garcia AA, Villagomez ET, Brown SA, Kouzekanani K, Hanis CL. The Starr County diabetes education study: development of the Spanish language diabetes knowledge questionnaire. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(1):16–21.  https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.24.1.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thompson B, Levitov JE. Using microcomputers to score and evaluate test items. Collegiate Microcomputer. 1985;3:163–8.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wood DA. Test construction: development and interpretation of achievement tests. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Books, Inc.; 1960.  https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1960.01710060064009.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Crocker L, Algina J. Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1986.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326888chc1502_3.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lord FM. The relationship of the reliability of multiple-choice test to the distribution of item difficulties. Psychometrika. 1952;18:181–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kelley TL. The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. J Educ Psychol. 1939;30:17–24.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ebel RL, Frisbie DA. Essentials of educational measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1986.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kuder GF, Richardson MW. The theory of the estimation of test reliability. Psychometrika. 1937;2(3):151–60.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02288391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pongmesa T, Li SC, Wee HL. A survey of knowledge on diabetes in the central region of Thailand. Value Health. 2009;12(s3):S110–3.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-733.2009.00641.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McPherson ML, Smith SW, Powers A, Zuckerman IH. Association between diabetes patients’ knowledge about medications and their blood glucose control. Res Social Admin Pharma. 2008;4:37–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2007.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Al-Qazaz HK, Sulaiman SA, Hassali MA, Shafie AA, Sundram S, et al. Diabetes knowledge, medication adherence and glycemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes. Int J Clin Pharm. 2011;33:1028–35.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-011-9582-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Atak N, Gurkan T, Kose K. The effect of education on knowledge, self- management behaviours and self -efficacy of patients with type 2 diabetes. Aust J Adv Nurs. 2008;26(2):66–74.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ingram M, Torres E, Redondo F, Bradford G, O’Toole ML. The impact of promotor as on social support and gylcemic control among members of a farmworker community on the US-Mexico border. Diabetes Educator. 2007;33(6):172S–8S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McEwen M, Baird M, Pasvogel A, Gallegos G. Health–illness transition experiences among Mexican immigrant women with diabetes. Fam Commun Health. 2007;30(3):201–12.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.FCH.0000277763.70031.0d.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cohen S, Hoberman H. Positive events and social support as buffers of life change stress. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1983;13:99–125.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1983.tb02325.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Swain S, Hariharan M. ‘Health communication between doctors and patients: Impact on patient adherence and disease prognosis’. (Unpublished doctorate thesis). University of Hyderabad: Hyderabad, India. 2013, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.119876.
  32. 32.
    Kim MT, Hill MN, Bone LR, Levine DM. Development and testing of the hill-bone compliance to high blood pressure therapy scale. Prog Cardiovasc Nurs. 2000;15(3):90–6.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-7117.2000.tb00211.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Research Society for Study of Diabetes in India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Health Psychology, School of Medical SciencesUniversity of HyderabadHyderabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Psychology, School of Social and Behavioural SciencesCentral University of KarnatakaGulbargaIndia
  3. 3.Centre for Health Psychology, School of Medical SciencesUniversity of Hyderabad, Central University Campus POHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations