ArticlePloS one2025
Validity and reliability of the Dietary Sodium Restriction Questionnaire in peritoneal dialysis patients.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe Chinese version of Dietary Sodium Restriction Questionnaire (DSRQ) was adapted to evaluate its reliability and validity for measuring adherence to a sodium-restricted diet in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients.
methodsSpecific items related to peritoneal dialysis were added to create a PD version of the DSRQ (PD-DSRQ), which was administered to 135 patients undergoing PD. Item analysis was performed using the critical ratio and homogeneity tests. The reliability of the questionnaire was determined by assessing the internal consistency. Content validity was evaluated using the expert evaluation method, and construct validity was assessed via exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses.
resultsThe item analysis revealed correlation coefficients (R-values) ranging from 0.311 to 0.745 for each item, with statistically significant differences between the high and low subgroups for all items. The Cronbach's α coefficients for the overall PD-DSRQ and the attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control subscales were 0.805, 0.892, 0.794, and 0.889, respectively. The item-level content validity index ranged from 0.83 to 1.00, and the scale-level content validity index/universal agreement was 0.9894. Exploratory factor analysis identified a three-factor structure consistent with the original DSRQ, except for Question 18. The three factors had eigenvalues of 5.302, 4.179, and 1.290, which explained 64.32% of the variance. The average variance extracted for each dimension was 0.5777, 0.5654, and 0.5259, and the composite reliability values were 0.8864, 0.7956, and 0.8802, respectively, demonstrating good convergent and discriminant validity.
conclusionThe PD-DSRQ encompasses general information and three dimensions: attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. The questionnaire demonstrated strong reliability and validity, making it a reliable tool for assessing adherence to sodium-restricted diets in patients undergoing PD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.