Four New Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Examining Health-Seeking Behavior in Persons With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (REDD-CAT): Instrument Development Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) includes mastery of complex care activities, self-management skills, and routine health care encounters to optimize glucose control and achieve good health. Given the lifelong course of T2DM, patients are faced with navigating complex medical and disease-specific information. This health-seeking behavior is a driver of health disparities and is associated with hospitalization and readmission. Given that health-seeking behavior is a potentially intervenable social determinant of health, a better understanding of how people navigate these complex systems is warranted. OBJECTIVE: To address this need, we aimed to develop new patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures that evaluate health-seeking behavior in persons with T2DM. These new PROs were designed to be included in the Re-Engineered Discharge for Diabetes-Computer Adaptive Test (REDD-CAT) measurement system, which includes several other PROs that capture the importance of social determinants of health. METHODS: Overall, 225 participants with T2DM completed 56 self-report items that examined health-seeking behaviors. Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory were used for measurement development. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA; criterion ratio of eigenvalue 1 to eigenvalue 2 being >4; variance for eigenvalue 1 ≥40%) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; criterion 1-factor CFA loading <.50; 1-factor CFA residual correlation >.20; comparative fit index ≥0.90; Tucker-Lewis index ≥0.90; root mean square error of approximation <0.15) were used to determine unidimensional sets of items. Items with sparse responses, low-adjusted total score correlations, nonmonotonicity, low factor loading, and high residual correlations of high error modification indices were candidates for exclusion. A constrained graded response model was used to examine item misfit, and differential item functioning was examined to identify item bias. Cronbach α was used to examine internal consistency reliability for the new PROs (criterion ≥0.70), and floor and ceiling effects were examined (criterion ≤20%). RESULTS: Four unidimensional sets of items were supported by EFA (all EFA eigenvalue ratios >4; variance for eigenvalue 1=41.4%-67.3%) and CFA (fit statistics all exceeded criterion values). This included (1) "Health-Seeking Behavior: PCP-Specific" (6 items); (2) "Health-Seeking Behavior: General Beliefs" (13 items); (3) "Health-Seeking Behavior: Family or Friends-Specific" (5 items); and (4) "Health-Seeking Behavior: Internet-Specific" (4 items). All items were devoid of differential item functioning for age, sex, education, or socioeconomic status factors. "Health-Seeking Behavior: General Beliefs" was developed to include both a computer adaptive test and a 6-item short form version; all other PROs were developed as static short forms. The psychometric reliability of these new PROs was supported; internal consistency ranged from acceptable to excellent (Cronbach α=.78-.91), and measures were free of significant floor or ceiling effects (floor effects range: 0%-8.9%; ceiling effects range: 0%-8.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The new REDD-CAT Health-Seeking Behavior PROs provide reliable assessments of health-seeking behaviors among those with T2DM.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».