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
. 2025 Sep;39(3):e70060.
doi: 10.1111/scs.70060.

Danish Version of 'The COPD Self-Efficacy Scale': Developing a 24-Item Version Using Rasch Analysis

Christina Emme  1 , André Torre  2 , Thomas Kallemose  2 , Tanja Sofie Hansen  2 , Ingrid Poulsen  2 , Vibeke Nørholm  2
Affiliations

Danish Version of 'The COPD Self-Efficacy Scale': Developing a 24-Item Version Using Rasch Analysis

Christina Emme et al. Scand J Caring Sci. 2025 Sep.

Abstract

Introduction: The concept of self-efficacy has been utilised as a modifiable outcome supporting patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Self-efficacy refers to the individual's beliefs in their ability to manage or avoid breathing difficulties. For patients with COPD, some items in the original 34-item COPD self-efficacy scale (CSES) were not applicable or were irrelevant. The aim of this study was to develop a short version of the Danish version of CSES including a face validity test.

Methods: Rasch analysis was employed to assess the psychometric properties using a dataset from the validation study of the Danish version of CSES. Face validity test was used to identify possible challenges in the reduced version of the scale.

Results: The analysis suggested two underlying factors, a physical (13 items) and an emotional (21 items). Evaluation on the reliability and accuracy estimates showed that the number of items within both factors could be reduced to 12, leaving a total of 24 items included in the CSES short version. The face validity test of the CSES short version showed that the length of the questionnaire was manageable, and the instructions were perceived clear and functional.

Conclusions: We found that the original COPD self-efficacy scale could be reduced from 34 to 24 items while still retaining acceptable levels of reliability and accuracy and with questions being comprehensible and relevant.

Keywords: COPD; Rasch analysis; self‐efficacy; short version of the COPD self‐efficacy scale.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, “Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease,” (2024).
    1. P. Ahnfeldt‐Mollerup, J. Lykkegaard, A. Halling, K. R. Olsen, and T. Kristensen, “Resource Allocation and the Burden of Co‐Morbidities Among Patients Diagnosed With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: An Observational Cohort Study From Danish General Practice,” BMC Health Services Research 16, no. 1 (2016): 1–12.
    1. A. M. Yohannes and G. S. Alexopoulos, “Depression and Anxiety in Patients With COPD,” European Respiratory Review 23, no. 133 (2014): 345–349.
    1. M. E. Wacker, R. A. Jörres, A. Karch, et al., “Assessing Health‐Related Quality of Life in COPD: Comparing Generic and Disease‐Specific Instruments With Focus on Comorbidities,” BMC Pulmonary Medicine 16, no. 1 (2016): 1–11.
    1. R. Gabriel, D. Figueiredo, C. Jácome, J. Cruz, and A. Marques, “Day‐To‐Day Living With Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Towards a Family‐Based Approach to the Illness Impacts,” Psychology & Health 29 (2014): 967–983.

LinkOut - more resources