Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr;38(4):e14468.
doi: 10.1111/dme.14468. Epub 2020 Dec 2.

Diabetes distress instruments in adults with Type 1 diabetes: A systematic review using the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) checklist

Eanna Kenny  1 , Róisín O'Malley  2 , Kevin Roche  2 , Eimear Morrissey  1   3 , Sean F Dinneen  3   4 , Molly Byrne  1 , Bláthín Casey  5
Affiliations

Diabetes distress instruments in adults with Type 1 diabetes: A systematic review using the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) checklist

Eanna Kenny et al. Diabet Med. 2021 Apr.

Abstract

Aims: To identify all extant instruments used to measure diabetes distress in adults with Type 1 diabetes and to evaluate the evidence for the measurement properties of these instruments.

Methods: Medline, Embase, CINAHL plus and PsycINFO were systematically searched from inception up until 12 March 2020 for all publications which evaluated the psychometric properties of diabetes distress measurement instruments. The quality of the methodology and the measurement properties in the identified studies were evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

Results: Seven out of the 7656 articles retrieved in the search were included in the final review. Four diabetes distress measurement instruments were identified, none of which displayed evidence for all measurement properties specified in the COSMIN guidelines. The Problem Areas in Diabetes-11 (PAID-11) demonstrated the best psychometric properties, displaying strong evidence for structural validity, internal consistency, hypothesis testing, responsiveness and criterion validity. The Problem Areas in Diabetes scale (PAID) was the most frequently investigated instrument, demonstrating good relevance and hypothesis testing across four studies; however, concerns remain over its factor structure.

Conclusion: The PAID-11 appears to be the most psychometrically sound instrument for measuring diabetes distress in adults with Type 1 diabetes, displaying strong evidence for a range of measurement properties. However, as only one study evaluated this instrument and its content validity has yet to be assessed, further validation is warranted. Additional qualitative work is needed to assess the content validity of these instruments among individuals with Type 1 diabetes.

Keywords: Type 1 diabetes; diabetes distress; emotional distress; psychometric properties; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

REFERENCES

    1. Sultan-Khan L. Diabetes, Type 1. In: Teichroew JK, editor. Chronic Diseases: An Encyclopedia of Causes, Effects, and Treatments [2 Volumes]. Santa Barbara, USA: ABC-CLIO, LLC; 2016; 268-271.
    1. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes-2019 abridged for primary care providers. Clinical Diabetes. 2019;37(1):11.
    1. Stuckey HL, Mullan-Jensen CB, Reach G, et al. Personal accounts of the negative and adaptive psychosocial experiences of people with diabetes in the second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN2) study. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(9):2466-2474.
    1. Polonsky WH, Anderson BJ, Lohrer PA, et al. Assessment of diabetes-related distress. Diabetes Care. 1995;18(6):754-760.
    1. Skinner TC, Joensen L, Parkin T. Twenty-five years of diabetes distress research. Diabet Med. 2020;37(3):393-400.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources