Psychometric Evaluation of the Persian Version of a Self-Care Evaluation Instrument to Prevent Diabetic Foot in Iranian Patients Predominantly with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (P-ISPDF).

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Elaheh Ghods, Razieh Bandari, Ali Montazeri
{"title":"Psychometric Evaluation of the Persian Version of a Self-Care Evaluation Instrument to Prevent Diabetic Foot in Iranian Patients Predominantly with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (P-ISPDF).","authors":"Elaheh Ghods, Razieh Bandari, Ali Montazeri","doi":"10.2147/DMSO.S603987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To translate and psychometrically validate the Persian version of the Instrument for Self-care in Preventing Diabetic Foot (P-ISPDF) as a reliable, culturally appropriate tool for assessing foot-specific self-care behaviors among Persian-speaking adults, predominantly those with type 2 diabetes mellitus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The ISPDF was translated using a forward-backward procedure, followed by expert review (n=5) and cognitive debriefing with patients (n=10). A split-sample design was used: exploratory factor analysis (EFA; n=289) and a series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs), including first-order, second-order, and a hierarchical general-factor model in an independent sample (n=250). Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1-5). Reliability (Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) and validity (EFA, CFA) were evaluated using SPSS 25, AMOS 24, and JASP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EFA supported a three-factor structure: self-care maintenance (10 items), monitoring (9 items), and management (7 items). The hierarchical measurement model showed good fit (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup>/<i>df</i>=2.80, CFI=0.974, TLI=0.954, RMSEA=0.060). Cronbach's alpha was 0.93 for the total scale, with subscale alphas ranging from 0.81 to 0.92. Test-retest reliability was excellent (two-way mixed-effects, absolute agreement ICCs 0.93-0.98 with 95% CIs reported).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The P-ISPDF demonstrated strong reliability and preliminary structural validity. However, due to mixed evidence regarding convergent validity and the absence of external validation, the findings should be interpreted with caution. Further psychometric refinement and longitudinal studies are needed to establish its clinical utility.</p>","PeriodicalId":11116,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and Therapy","volume":"19 ","pages":"603987"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13549173/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/DMSO.S603987","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To translate and psychometrically validate the Persian version of the Instrument for Self-care in Preventing Diabetic Foot (P-ISPDF) as a reliable, culturally appropriate tool for assessing foot-specific self-care behaviors among Persian-speaking adults, predominantly those with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Methods: The ISPDF was translated using a forward-backward procedure, followed by expert review (n=5) and cognitive debriefing with patients (n=10). A split-sample design was used: exploratory factor analysis (EFA; n=289) and a series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs), including first-order, second-order, and a hierarchical general-factor model in an independent sample (n=250). Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1-5). Reliability (Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) and validity (EFA, CFA) were evaluated using SPSS 25, AMOS 24, and JASP.

Results: EFA supported a three-factor structure: self-care maintenance (10 items), monitoring (9 items), and management (7 items). The hierarchical measurement model showed good fit (χ 2/df=2.80, CFI=0.974, TLI=0.954, RMSEA=0.060). Cronbach's alpha was 0.93 for the total scale, with subscale alphas ranging from 0.81 to 0.92. Test-retest reliability was excellent (two-way mixed-effects, absolute agreement ICCs 0.93-0.98 with 95% CIs reported).

Conclusion: The P-ISPDF demonstrated strong reliability and preliminary structural validity. However, due to mixed evidence regarding convergent validity and the absence of external validation, the findings should be interpreted with caution. Further psychometric refinement and longitudinal studies are needed to establish its clinical utility.

伊朗2型糖尿病患者(P-ISPDF)预防糖尿病足的波斯语版自我护理评估工具的心理测量学评估。
目的:翻译和心理测量学验证波斯语版预防糖尿病足自我护理工具(P-ISPDF)作为评估波斯语成年人(主要是2型糖尿病患者)足特异性自我护理行为的可靠,文化上合适的工具。方法:采用向前-向后程序翻译ISPDF,随后进行专家评审(n=5)和患者认知情况汇报(n=10)。采用分样本设计:探索性因子分析(EFA, n=289)和一系列验证性因子分析(CFAs),包括独立样本(n=250)的一阶、二阶和分层一般因子模型。项目按5分李克特量表(1-5)进行评分。信度(Cronbach’s alpha, McDonald’s omega, class内相关系数[ICC])和效度(EFA, CFA)采用SPSS 25、AMOS 24和JASP进行评估。结果:全民教育支持自我护理维持(10项)、监测(9项)和管理(7项)三因素结构。分层测量模型拟合良好(χ 2/df=2.80, CFI=0.974, TLI=0.954, RMSEA=0.060)。总量表的Cronbach’s alpha为0.93,次量表的alpha为0.81 ~ 0.92。重测信度极好(双向混合效应,绝对一致性ICCs 0.93-0.98, 95% ci报告)。结论:P-ISPDF具有较强的信度和初步结构效度。然而,由于关于趋同效度的混合证据和缺乏外部验证,研究结果应谨慎解释。需要进一步的心理测量改进和纵向研究来确定其临床应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and Therapy
Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and Therapy Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.10%
发文量
431
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: An international, peer-reviewed, open access, online journal. The journal is committed to the rapid publication of the latest laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity research. Original research, review, case reports, hypothesis formation, expert opinion and commentaries are all considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书