ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2026
Development and validation of a type 1 diabetes self-management scale for children.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to develop a type 1 diabetes mellitus self-management scale for children and to assess its psychometric properties.
methodsA methodological, descriptive, correlational, and cross-sectional study was conducted. The research sample comprised 212 children with diabetes aged 7-12 years. Content validity was evaluated by seven experts in pediatric endocrinology, pediatric nursing, public health nursing, and Turkish language. Descriptive statistics, correlation analyses, Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, split-half reliability, and factor analyses were used.
resultsThe Cronbach's alpha for the overall scale was 0.893, and for the subscales, it ranged from 0.757 to 0.845. The item-total score correlations ranged from 0.408 to 0.660. Exploratory factor analysis revealed a four-factor structure that explained 57.730% of the total variance, with item loadings ranging from 0.380 to 0.863. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the four-factor structure, with factor loadings ranging from 0.52 to 0.87 and acceptable fit indices: χ2/df=1.461, goodness-of-fit index=0.901, comparative fit index=0.939, incremental fit index=0.941, Tucker-Lewis index=0.926, and root mean square error of approximation=0.066.
conclusionThe validity and reliability analyses revealed that the scale is a valid and reliable measure in Turkish culture.
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.