TURKISH VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF PEDIATRIC DIABETES ROUTINES QUESTIONNAIRE

Öz

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Pediatric Diabetes Routines Questionnaire (PDRQ) for parents of children diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM), in order to determine its applicability in assessing children's daily diabetes-related routines. Method: This methodological study was conducted face-to-face with 131 parents of children aged 5-17 who visited the outpatient diabetes clinic of a women’s and children’s hospital in the southeastern part of Türkiye. The adaptation followed standard procedures including translation, back-translation, expert evaluation, a pilot study, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Reliability was examined using Cronbach’s alpha, item-total correlations, and split-half methods. Results: Based on the exploratory factor analysis, it was determined that the scale was explained by five factors instead of the original two-factor structure. However, the confirmatory factor analysis showed that the two-factor structure of the original version, consisting of “daily regimen routines” and “technical/situational routines,” was largely preserved. With three modifications made without removing any items, the model fit indices of the scale were found to be at an acceptable level (χ²/df=1.60, RMSEA=0.068, SRMR=0.079, CFI=0.99, and NNFI=0.90). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the total of 21 items was 0.822, while the values for the subscales were 0.752 and 0.655, respectively. These findings indicate that the Turkish version of the PDRQ is a valid and reliable measurement tool. Conclusion: The 21-item Turkish version of the Pediatric Diabetes Routines Questionnaire (PDRQ) has been found to be a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the daily diabetes management routines of children diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. This scale can be confidently used in both clinical practice and scientific research to objectively evaluate the level of parental involvement in their children’s diabetes management.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Diabetes Mellitus
• Type 1
• Activities of Daily Living
• Parents
• Psychometrics

PEDİATRİK DİYABET RUTİNLERİ ÖLÇEĞİNİN TÜRKÇE GEÇERLİK VE GÜVENİRLİK ÇALIŞMASI

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, Tip 1 Diyabetes Mellitus (T1DM) tanısı almış çocukların ebeveynleri için geliştirilen Pediatrik Diyabet Rutinleri Ölçeği’nin (PDRQ) Türkçe formunun geçerlilik ve güvenirliğini değerlendirerek, çocukların diyabete ilişkin günlük rutinlerinin ölçülmesinde kullanılabilirliğini belirlemektir. Yöntem: Bu metodolojik çalışma, Türkiye'nin güneydoğu kesiminde bulunan bir kadın ve çocuk hastanesinin diyabet polikliniğini ziyaret eden 5-17 yaş arası çocukların 131 ebeveyniyle yüz yüze görüşme yapılarak gerçekleştirildi. Kültürel uyarlama sürecinde; çeviri, geri çeviri, uzman görüşü alma, pilot çalışma, açıklayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) adımları gerçekleştirildi. Güvenirlik ise Cronbach alfa katsayısı, madde-toplam korelasyonları ve yarı yarıya güvenilirlik yöntemleriyle değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Yapılan açıklayıcı faktör analizi doğrultusunda ölçeğin original formunda yer alan iki faktörlü yapı yerine beş faktör ile açıklandığı belirlendi. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda ise ölçeğin özgün versiyonunda yer alan iki faktörlü yapı, “günlük rejim rutinleri” ile “teknik/durumsal rutinler” olmak üzere, büyük oranda korundu. Ölçekten madde çıkarılmadan yapılan üç modifikasyonla ölçeğin model uyum indekslerinin kabul edilebilir düzeyde olduğu belirlendi (χ²/df=1.60, RMSEA=0.068, SRMR=0.079, CFI=0.99, and NNFI= 0.90). Toplam 21 madde için Cronbach alfa katsayısı 0.822 olarak bulundu. Alt ölçekler için bu değerler sırasıyla 0.752 ve 0.655 idi. Bu bulgular Türkçe PDRQ’nun geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracı olduğunu gösterdi. Sonuç: PDRQ ölçeğinin 21 maddeli Türkçe formunun Tip 1 Diyabetus Mellitus tanısı almış çocukların günlük diyabet yönetim rutinlerinin değerlendirilmesinde geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracı olduğu belirlendi. Bu ölçek hem klinik uygulamalarda hem de bilimsel çalışmalarda, ebeveynlerin çocuklarının diyabet yönetimine katılım düzeylerini nesnel olarak değerlendirmek amacıyla güvenle kullanılabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Diyabet Mellitus
• Tip 1
• Günlük Yaşam Aktiviteleri
• Ebeveynler
• Psikometri

Kaynakça

1. Papadakis JL, Shapiro JB, Evans M, et al. Psychometric properties of the diabetes skills checklist for adolescents with type 1 diabetes and their parents. Pediatr Diabetes. 2021;22(6):924-932.
2. American Diabetes Association; Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022 Abridged for Primary Care Providers. Clin Diabetes. 2022; 40:10-38.
3. Cosmescu A, Pharmacy I, Oltean C, et al. Major variations in blood glucose levels in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. Rom J Med Pract. 2020;15:441-445.
4. Meena J, Yadav J, Kumar J, et al. Incidence, predictors, and short-term outcomes of acute kidney injury in children with diabetic ketoacidosis: a systematic review. Pediatr Nephrol. 2023;1-9.
5. Brar P, Tell S, Mehta S, Franklin B. Hyperosmolar diabetic ketoacidosis-- review of literature and the shifting paradigm in evaluation and management. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2021;15(6):102313.
6. Pierce JS. Examination of the pediatric diabetes routines questionnaire in adolescents: Development of an adolescent self-report version and confirmatory factor analysis [dissertation]. University of Southern Mississippi; 2013.
7. Hur KY. 2021 clinical practice guidelines for diabetes: Pharmacotherapy and the Korean Diabetes Association Support System. J Korean Diabetes. 2021;22(4):250-258.
8. American Diabetes Association (ADA) Statement. Introduction: standards of medical care in diabetes-2022. Diabetes Care. 2021;45(Supplement 1):S1-S2.

9. Anifowoshe K, Jaser S; 722-p. The value of collaborative parental ınvolvement in diabetes management for youth with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes. 2023;72 (Supplement 1):722-p.
10. Yamaguchi M, Honda J, Fukui M. Effects of parental ınvolvement on glycemic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a scoping review. J Fam Nurs. 2023;29:382-394.
11. Öztornaci B, Akgül E, Yanar N, et al. The Effect of Parental Collaboration on Diabetes Self-efficacy, Quality of Life and HbA1c Level in Adolescents Diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes. J Clin Res Pediatr Endocrinol. 2024;17:176-184.
12. Smudja M, Milenkovic T, Minaković I, Zdravković V, Javorac J, Milutinović D. Self-care activities in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. PLoS One. 2024;19:e0300055.
13. Pierce JS, Jordan SS. Development and evaluation of the pediatric diabetes routines questionnaire. Child Health Care. 2012;41(1):56-77.
14. Gökdemir F, Yılmaz T. Processes of using, modifying, adapting and developing likert type scales. J Nursology. 2023;26(2):148-160.
15. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed. Pearson Education Limited; 2014.
16. Elbalshy M, Boucher S, Crocket H, et al. Exploring parental experiences of using a do-it-yourself solution for continuous glucose monitoring among children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a qualitative study. J Diabetes Sci. 2020;14(5):844-853.
17. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, Erikson P. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value Health. 2005;8(2):94-104.
18. Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2006;29(5):489-497.
19. Davis LL. Instrument review: getting the most from a panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res. 1992;5:194-197.
20. Almanasreh E, Moles R, Chen TF. Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(2):214-221.
21. Emerson, R. Kendall's W and Inter-rater Reliability. J Vis Impair Blind. 2023;117:336-336.
22. Jöreskog K, Sörbom D. LISREL [Computer Software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software, Inc. 2000.
23. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 6th ed. Pearson Education; 2013.
24. Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research 2nd ed. The Guilford Press; 2015. Byrne BM. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. 3rd ed. Routledge; 2016.
25. Lomax RG. A Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. 4th ed. Routledge; 2015.
26. Çokluk Ö, Şekercioğlu G, Büyüköztürk Ş. Multivariate statistics for social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications. 8th ed. Ankara: Pegem Academy; 2025.
27. Pierce JS, Jordan SS, Arnau RC. Development and validation of the pediatric diabetes routines questionnaire for adolescents. J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2019;26(1):47-58.
28. Wilcocks CP, Enlow P, Wasserman R, et al. Development and evaluation of the pediatric diabetes routine questionnaire for parents of young children with type 1 diabetes. J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2023;30(1):216-226.
29. Taber KS. The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Res Sci Educ. 2018;48(6):1273-1296.
30. George D, Mallery P. SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 14th ed. Allyn & Bacon; 2024.
31. DeVellis RF. Scale development: Theory and applications. 5th ed. Sage Publications; 2021.
32. Büyüköztürk Ş. Handbook of data analysis for social sciences: Statistics, research design, SPSS applications, and interpretation.31st ed. Ankara: Pegem Academy; 2024.
33. Tavşancıl E. Measurement of attitudes and data analysis with SPSS. 5th ed. Nobel Publications; 2014.
34. Kalaycı Ş. Multivariate statistical techniques with SPSS applications. 11th ed. Seçkin Publications; 2021.