IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0333760.html

Development and validation of an asthma self-knowledge questionnaire

Author

Listed:
  • Adalberto Fernandes Dos Santos
  • Renata Costa
  • Henrique Pereira
  • Ana Rita Pedro
  • Luis Taborda-Barata

Abstract

Background: Validated questionnaires for adequately assessing knowledge about asthma are scarce. Thus, the primary objective of the present study was to develop and validate an asthma self-knowledge questionnaire, based on international recommendations on the disease. The secondary objectives were to compare knowledge about asthma between asthmatic patients and non-asthmatic individuals; assessing whether asthma affects the level of self-knowledge of the disease and what factors may be associated with poorer self-knowledge of the disease. Methods: The Bronchial Asthma Self-Knowledge Questionnaire was developed, and validation studies were performed: logical or apparent validity, content validity, construct validity; internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha test), test-retest or reproducibility, in a face-to-face survey with 104 asthmatic patients and 131 non-asthmatic individuals (n = 235). Other questionnaires were also applied: Mini Mental State Examination (in individuals over 65 years of age), Depression Scales (CES-D for individuals under 65 and GDS for individuals over 65 years of age), Demographic Questionnaire, Health Literacy, and the Characterization Questionnaire for bronchial asthma. Results: Regarding development of the questionnaire, content validity, determined using I-CVI allowed reducing the questionnaire to 21 items. The test proved to have an acceptable value of in-ternal consistency and the data were considered as normally distributed; the questionnaire presented good temporal stability, by test-retest, although Spearman rho values were significantly stronger in the asthmatic group. Finally, confirmatory factorial analysis yielded acceptable values for PCFI and PGFI, as well as a satisfactory value for RMSEA. In terms of the application of the questionnaire, both groups under study (asthmatics and non-asthmatics) showed statistically significant differences in replies of self-knowledge questionnaire items. Finally, factors such as health literacy disturbances seem to marginally influence self-knowledge of bronchial asthma. Conclusions: The developed and validated questionnaire showed adequate psychometric robustness. In terms of construct validity, by known group (bronchial asthma) validity, the test was able to discriminate between patients with asthma and participants without asthma, regarding self-knowledge of the disease.

Suggested Citation

  • Adalberto Fernandes Dos Santos & Renata Costa & Henrique Pereira & Ana Rita Pedro & Luis Taborda-Barata, 2025. "Development and validation of an asthma self-knowledge questionnaire," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(10), pages 1-17, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0333760
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0333760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0333760
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0333760&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0333760?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0333760. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.