Advertisement

Stigma Perceived and Experienced by Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: Linguistic Adaptation and Psychometric Validation of the Danish Version of the Type 1 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale (DSAS-1 DK)

  • Ulla Møller HansenEmail author
  • Ingrid Willaing
  • Adriana D. Ventura
  • Kasper Olesen
  • Jane Speight
  • Jessica L. Browne
Original Research Article

Abstract

Objectives

We aimed to (a) culturally and linguistically adapt the Type 1 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale (DSAS-1) from English (for Australia) into Danish and (b) examine psychometric properties of the measure among Danish adults with type 1 diabetes.

Methods

We performed a forward–backward translation, face validity interviews with experts and cognitive debriefing of the Danish version (DSAS-1 DK) with ten adults from the target group. The DSAS-1 DK was then completed by 1594 adults with type 1 diabetes. Electronic clinical records provided age, diabetes duration, diabetes-related complications, and glycemic control [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c)]. We examined internal consistency, construct validity and structural validity of the DSAS-1 DK using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in a cross-validation design.

Results

The translated measure was found acceptable by the experts and target group, with only minor adaptations required for the Danish context. The DSAS-1 DK structure was best represented by a three-factor model representing the subscales ‘Treated Differently,’ ‘Blame and Judgement,’ and ‘Identity Concern’ (α = 0.88–0.89). The results also provided some support for calculation of a total score (19-item scale; α = 0.75). The subscales and total scale demonstrated satisfactory convergent and discriminant validity. Good structural validity was demonstrated for the three-factor model for four out of five indices [normed χ 2 = 4.257, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.923, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.065, standardized root mean square residual (SRMSR) = 0.0567, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.93].

Conclusion

The DSAS-1 DK has a confirmed three-factor structure, consistent with the original Australian English version. The measure is now validated and available to advance research into the stigma perceived and experienced by adults with type 1 diabetes in a Danish context.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank all the study participants for volunteering their time and insights. We acknowledge Dr. Kylie Mosely, who contributed to the development of the original DSAS-1 (English version, for Australia) and to the concept elaboration document enabling linguistic adaptation. We acknowledge Dr. Birgit Gemal (a native Danish-speaking psychologist fluent in English), who provided independent advice to the DSAS-1 developers during the translation process. We acknowledge Dr. Sonia Zafar who undertook the backward translation of the DSAS-1 DK. The DSAS-1 DK as well as the original DSAS-1 are available free of charge to academic researchers, clinicians and students for use in non-commercially funded research. Potential users are advised to email info@acbrd.org.au to enquire about or access the latest version of the questionnaire (including instructions for administering the measure) and scoring guidance.

Author contributions

The cultural and linguistic validation protocol was prepared by UMH with feedback from all authors. UMH, KO and IW translated the DSAS-1 from English to Danish and designed the survey, which included the DSAS-1 DK. JLB, ADV and JS developed the original DSAS-1 in English (for Australia), provided a concept elaboration document to inform the translation, and provided feedback on the translation reconciliations prior to finalizing the new language version. UMH conducted data analyses, which were reviewed by ADV, KO and JLB. UMH prepared the first draft of the manuscript, and all authors provided feedback and revisions on the first and subsequent drafts. All authors approved the final submitted manuscript. JLB, as senior author, takes overall responsibility for the content of the article.

Funding

This work was supported by an unrestricted grant from Innovation Fund Denmark (Grant no. 4135-00019B). JS and JLB are supported by core funding provided to the Australian Centre for Behavioural Research in Diabetes from Diabetes Victoria and Deakin University.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical approval

The study was registered with the Danish Data Protection Agency (j.nr. SDC-2015-033 DiA/I-Suite nr. 03813). According to the Committees on Health Research Ethics in the Capital Region of Denmark, the study does not require ethical approval, as it does not implicate the use of human biological materials (jr.nr. forespørgsel H-15015747/2015).

Informed consent

In the invitation to take part in the survey, participants were informed about the purpose of the study and informed that by proceeding to the survey and completing it they provided consent. They were also informed that no personally identifiable data would be disclosed.

Conflict of interest

ADV, JS and JLB are employed at the Australian Centre for Behavioural Research in Diabetes, which owns the copyright of the DSAS-1 in all its language versions. UMH, IW, and KO have no conflict of interest to declare.

Supplementary material

40271_2017_289_MOESM1_ESM.docx (130 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 129 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Young-Hyman D, et al. Psychosocial care for people with diabetes: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2016;39(12):2126–40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nicolucci A, et al. Diabetes attitudes, wishes and needs second study (DAWN2): cross-national benchmarking of diabetes-related psychosocial outcomes for people with diabetes. Diabet Med. 2013;30(7):767–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weiss MG, Ramakrishna J. Stigma interventions and research for international health. Lancet. 2006;367(9509):536–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mahajan AP, et al. Stigma in the HIV/AIDS epidemic: a review of the literature and recommendations for the way forward. Aids. 2008;22(Suppl 2):S67–79.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jacoby A, Snape D, Baker GA. Epilepsy and social identity: the stigma of a chronic neurological disorder. Lancet Neurol. 2005;4(3):171–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corrigan PW, Watson AC. Understanding the impact of stigma on people with mental illness. World Psychiatry. 2002;1(1):16–20.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Browne JL, et al. I’m not a druggie, I’m just a diabetic’: a qualitative study of stigma from the perspective of adults with type 1 diabetes. BMJ Open. 2014;4(7):e005625.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Browne JL, et al. Measuring type 1 diabetes stigma: development and validation of the Type 1 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale (DSAS-1). Diabet Med. 2017;34(12):1773–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schabert J, et al. Social stigma in diabetes: a framework to understand a growing problem for an increasing epidemic. Patient. 2013;6(1):1–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Browne JL, V.A., Mosley K, Speight J. Development and validation of the Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scales (DSAS-1 and DSAS-2), in American Diabetes Association 76th Scientific Sessions, New Orleans; 2016.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Acquadro C, et al. Literature review of methods to translate health-related quality of life questionnaires for use in multinational clinical trials. Value Health. 2008;11(3):509–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Acquadro C, et al. Linguistic validation manual for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments. Lyon: MAPI Research Institute; 2004.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc; 1994.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Polonsky WH, et al. Assessment of diabetes-related distress. Diabetes Care. 1995;18(6):754–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McGuire BE, et al. Short-form measures of diabetes-related emotional distress: the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale (PAID)-5 and PAID-1. Diabetologia. 2010;53(1):66–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rosenberg M. Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books; 1979.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nathan DM, Turgeon H, Regan S. Relationship between glycated haemoglobin levels and mean glucose levels over time. Diabetologia. 2007;50(11):2239–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sacks DB, et al. Position statement executive summary: guidelines and recommendations for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(6):1419–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Terwee CB, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Floyd FJ, Widaman KF. Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychol Assess. 1995;7:286–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thurstone LL. The calibration of test items. Am Psychol. 1947;2(3):103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. 2nd ed. New York: The Guilford Press; 2015.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. Structural equation modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. Electron J Bus Res Methods. 2008;6(1):53–60.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gerbing DW, Anderson JC. An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. J Mark Res. 1988;25(2):186–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Levine T. Confirmatory factor analysis and scale validation in communication research. Commun Res Rep. 2005;22(4):335–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    O’Rourke N, Hatcher L. A step-by-step approach to using SAS for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. 2nd ed. Cary: SAS Institute Inc; 2013.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bagozzi RP, Yi Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J Acad Mark Sci. 1988;16(1):74–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fornell C, Larcker DF. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: algebra and statistics. J Mark Res. 1981;18:39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Björnsson CH. Læsbarhed. København Gad; 1971.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hair JF, et al. Multivariate data analysis. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall, Inc; 1998.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ventura AD, et al. Diabetes MILES-2 2016 survey report. The Australian Centre for Behavioural Research in Diabetes: Diabetes Victoria, Melbourne; 2016.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Joensen LE. Psychosocial health in type 1 diabetes. A study of bio-psycho-social interactions and the investigation of conceptual framework for social support targeting adults with type 1 diabetes. Faculty of health and medical sciences. University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg Trykkeri; 2014.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    IDF. International charter of rights and responsibilities of people with diabetes. 2014. [cited 2017 April 27]. https://www.idf.org/about-diabetes/charter-of-rights.html. Accessed Dec 2017.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Diabetes Management ResearchGentofteDenmark
  2. 2.National Institute of Public HealthUniveristy of Southern DenmarkCopenhagenDenmark
  3. 3.School of PsychologyDeakin UniversityGeelongAustralia
  4. 4.The Australian Centre for Behavioural Research in DiabetesMelbourneAustralia
  5. 5.AHP ResearchHornchurchUK

Personalised recommendations