Validation of the Therapeutic Self-Care Scale-European Portuguese Version in Primary Care Type 2 Diabetes Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-care is an important nursing-sensitive outcome. Reliable and valid measures are needed for therapeutic self-care assessment that may inform the development and evaluation of individualized nursing interventions co-created with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) adults. The therapeutic self-care scale European Portuguese version (TSCS-EPV) is a validated generic measure that may be used to assess self-care in T2DM adults. AIM: To examine the psychometric properties of the TSCS-EP version in T2DM adults, in primary health care. METHODS: A cross-sectional pilot study in a convenience sample of 80 adults with T2DM from two primary health care centers in Portugal was conducted. Individuals completed the Portuguese version of the TSC scale. RESULTS: A three-factor solution emerged from the principal component analysis: "Recognizing and managing signs and symptoms"; "Managing changes in health condition" and "Managing medication", explaining 75% of the total variance. Total scale Cronbach's alpha was 0.884 and for the three factors ranged from 0.808 to 0.954. CONCLUSION: the therapeutic self-care scale European Portuguese version is a promising scale for assessing therapeutic self-care abilities in adults with T2DM in primary care settings. More consistent results on its validity and reliability are needed for it to be used in the country.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".