Display options
Cite
Frei A, Svarin A, Steurer-Stey C, et al. Self-efficacy instruments for patients with chronic diseases suffer from methodological limitations--a systematic review. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009;7:86doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-86.
Frei, A., Svarin, A., Steurer-Stey, C., & Puhan, M. A. (2009). Self-efficacy instruments for patients with chronic diseases suffer from methodological limitations--a systematic review. Health and quality of life outcomes, 786. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-7-86
Frei, Anja, et al. "Self-efficacy instruments for patients with chronic diseases suffer from methodological limitations--a systematic review." Health and quality of life outcomes vol. 7 (2009): 86. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-7-86
Frei A, Svarin A, Steurer-Stey C, Puhan MA. Self-efficacy instruments for patients with chronic diseases suffer from methodological limitations--a systematic review. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009 Sep 26;7:86. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-86. PMID: 19781095; PMCID: PMC2761851.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009 Sep 26;7:86. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-86.

Self-efficacy instruments for patients with chronic diseases suffer from methodological limitations--a systematic review.

Health and quality of life outcomes

Anja Frei, Anna Svarin, Claudia Steurer-Stey, Milo A Puhan

Affiliations

  1. Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Zurich, Switzerland. [email protected]

PMID: 19781095 PMCID: PMC2761851 DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-86

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Measurement of self-efficacy requires carefully developed and validated instruments. It is currently unclear whether available self-efficacy instruments for chronic diseases fulfill these requirements. Our aim was to systematically identify all existing self-efficacy scales for five major chronic diseases and to assess their development and validation process.

METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search in electronic databases (MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, and EMBASE) to identify studies describing the development and/or validation process of self-efficacy instruments for the five chronic diseases diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, arthritis, and heart failure. Two members of the review team independently selected articles meeting inclusion criteria. The self-efficacy instruments were evaluated in terms of their development (aim of instrument, a priori considerations, identification of items, selection of items, development of domains, answer options) and validation (test-retest reliability, internal consistency reliability, validity, responsiveness) process.

RESULTS: Of 584 potentially eligible papers we included 25 (13 for diabetes, 5 for asthma, 4 for arthritis, 3 for COPD, 0 for heart failure) which covered 26 different self-efficacy instrument versions. For 8 instruments (30.8%), the authors described the aim before the scales were developed whereas for the other instruments the aim was unclear. In one study (3.8%) a priori considerations were specified. In none of the studies a systematic literature search was carried out to identify items. The item selection process was often not clearly described (38.5%). Test-retest reliability was assessed for 9 instruments (34.6%), validity using a correlational approach for 18 (69.2%), and responsiveness to change for 3 (11.5%) instruments.

CONCLUSION: The development and validation process of the majority of the self-efficacy instruments had major limitations. The aim of the instruments was often not specified and for most instruments, not all measurement properties that are important to support the specific aim of the instrument (for example responsiveness for evaluative instruments) were assessed. Researchers who develop and validate self-efficacy instruments should adhere more closely to important methodological concepts for development and validation of patient-reported outcomes and report their methods more transparently. We propose a systematic five step approach for the development and validation of self-efficacy instruments.

References

  1. Diabetes Educ. 2000 Jul-Aug;26(4):673-80 - PubMed
  2. Ann Behav Med. 2003 Aug;26(1):1-7 - PubMed
  3. Arthritis Rheum. 2001 Apr;45(2):159-66 - PubMed
  4. Arthritis Care Res. 2000 Aug;13(4):227-36 - PubMed
  5. Public Health Nutr. 2007 Jun;10(6):628-34 - PubMed
  6. J Asthma. 1999;36(1):115-28 - PubMed
  7. Ann Allergy. 1987 Oct;59(4):273-7 - PubMed
  8. Psychol Rev. 1977 Mar;84(2):191-215 - PubMed
  9. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2005 Sep;1(3):389-407 - PubMed
  10. Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:1-26 - PubMed
  11. Diabetes Care. 1992 Jan;15(1):90-4 - PubMed
  12. Pediatr Diabetes. 2007 Feb;8(1):21-7 - PubMed
  13. Respir Med. 2007 Feb;101(2):308-16 - PubMed
  14. Patient Educ Couns. 2002 Oct -Nov;48(2):177-87 - PubMed
  15. J Pediatr Psychol. 1986 Mar;11(1):103-17 - PubMed
  16. Sch Inq Nurs Pract. 2001 Fall;15(3):223-33 - PubMed
  17. Arthritis Rheum. 1989 Jan;32(1):37-44 - PubMed
  18. J Appl Meas. 2006;7(1):55-73 - PubMed
  19. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2001 Nov;40(11):1221-30 - PubMed
  20. Heart Lung. 2007 May-Jun;36(3):205-16 - PubMed
  21. J Chronic Dis. 1985;38(1):27-36 - PubMed
  22. J Asthma. 1992;29(2):99-108 - PubMed
  23. J Adv Nurs. 1999 Aug;30(2):352-9 - PubMed
  24. Diabetes Care. 2003 Mar;26(3):713-8 - PubMed
  25. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 2006 Nov-Dec;26(6):395-404 - PubMed
  26. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2006 Apr;27(2):98-105 - PubMed
  27. J Pediatr Nurs. 1998 Aug;13(4):224-33 - PubMed
  28. Chest. 1991 May;99(5):1193-6 - PubMed
  29. J Behav Med. 1997 Jun;20(3):291-312 - PubMed
  30. Diabetes Care. 1987 May-Jun;10(3):324-9 - PubMed
  31. Qual Life Res. 2003 Jun;12(4):349-62 - PubMed
  32. Diabetes Educ. 1992 Mar-Apr;18(2):146-50 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types