IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v23y2014i7-8p1095-1104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Short‐form Chronic Disease Self‐Efficacy Scales for older adults

Author

Listed:
  • Susan Ka Yee Chow
  • Frances KY Wong

Abstract

Aims and objectives To examine the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Short‐form Chronic Disease Self Efficacy Scales. Background The prevalence of chronic disease is accelerating globally, advancing across every region and pervading all socioeconomic classes. Among the interventions, self‐management programmes focusing on increasing self‐efficacy have demonstrated significant patient outcomes, including the improvement of quality of life and functional status. The Chronic Disease Self‐Efficacy Scales (CDSES) system developed by Lorig in 1996 has been widely used by healthcare professionals from different disciplines to measure self‐efficacy for chronic disease patients due to their tested psychometric properties. The Short‐form of the scales system is used today, as it takes substantially less time to administer. Design This study used psychometric testing to establish the validity and reliability of the Short‐form Chronic Disease Self‐Efficacy Scales (CDSES). Methods A convenience sample of 163 older patients with chronic diseases were recruited. The Chinese version of the CDSES, short‐form CDSES, SF‐36 and self‐rated health were used to test for construct validity, concurrent validity, convergent validity and internal consistency. Results Short‐form CDSES had a single‐factor structure with high internal consistency (0·96) and demonstrated no floor or ceiling effects. High intraclass correlation, 0·98, was demonstrated in test–retest. Correlations with the domain scores of the CDSES were found to be r = 0·97 and 0·98. The scale also demonstrated significant moderate correlations with SF‐36 and self‐rated health. Conclusion The Chinese version of the Short‐form CDSES has shown statistically acceptable levels of reliability and validity for assessing self‐efficacy in older patients with chronic diseases. Relevance to clinical practice The scale is particularly valuable for use among older patients with chronic illness. The questionnaire can be used to assess nursing interventions focusing on increasing patients' self‐efficacy or routine patient screening in carrying out daily activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan Ka Yee Chow & Frances KY Wong, 2014. "The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Short‐form Chronic Disease Self‐Efficacy Scales for older adults," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(7-8), pages 1095-1104, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:7-8:p:1095-1104
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12298
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12298
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.12298?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:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:7-8:p:1095-1104. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    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.