Michiganský znalostní test o diabetu: ověření modifikované verze mezi českými studenty ošetřovatelství

Kudlová, Pavla; Kočvarová, Ilona; Soukup, Petr

dc.title	Michiganský znalostní test o diabetu: ověření modifikované verze mezi českými studenty ošetřovatelství	cs
dc.title	Michigan diabetes knowledge test: validation of modified version among Czech students of nursing	en
dc.contributor.author	Kudlová, Pavla
dc.contributor.author	Kočvarová, Ilona
dc.contributor.author	Soukup, Petr
dc.relation.ispartof	Kontakt-Journal of Nursing and Social Sciences Related to Health and Illness
dc.identifier.issn	1212-4117 Scopus Sources, Sherpa/RoMEO, JCR
dc.identifier.issn	1804-7122 Scopus Sources, Sherpa/RoMEO, JCR
dc.date.issued	2022
utb.relation.volume	24
utb.relation.issue	2
dc.citation.spage	114
dc.citation.epage	122
dc.type	article
dc.language.iso	en
dc.publisher	University of South Bohemia
dc.identifier.doi	10.32725/kont.2022.018
dc.relation.uri	http://kont.zsf.jcu.cz/artkey/knt-202202-0003_michigansky-znalostni-test-o-diabetu-overeni-modifikovane-verze-mezi-ceskymi-studenty-osetrovatelstvi.php
dc.subject	classical test theory	en
dc.subject	item response theory	en
dc.subject	Michigan Diabetes Knowledge Test (MDKT)	en
dc.subject	nursing students	en
dc.subject	reliability	en
dc.subject	validity	en
dc.description.abstract	Michigan Diabetes Knowledge Tool (MDKT) was developed to test the level of knowledge in managing Diabetes Mellitus. It is widely used as an original (for patients) and modified tool (for nurses or nursing students) around the world. Objectives: The aim is psychometric testing of the modified MDKT. Methods: This quantitative study uses descriptive statistics, Classical Test Theory (CTT), Item Response Theory (ITT), and reliability estimation within the convenient sample of students of nursing (N = 133). Data collection took place in 2018-2019 at a selected Czech University. Results: Using the MDKT only enables us to differentiate within a narrow spectrum of students whose knowledge is sub-average to average. The analysis has suggested the possibility of reducing the test while maintaining its psychometric parameters. Conclusions: The test is reliable, however too simple for our convenient sample of third-year nursing students, but this result cannot be generalised. Future investigations may lead to possible modifications, for example creating a more difficult version of the test and its revalidation.	en
utb.faculty	Faculty of Humanities
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10563/1011039
utb.identifier.obdid	43883891
utb.identifier.scopus	2-s2.0-85132797468
utb.identifier.wok	000849269100003
utb.source	j-scopus
dc.date.accessioned	2022-07-13T14:42:43Z
dc.date.available	2022-07-13T14:42:43Z
dc.description.sponsorship	Univerzita Tomáše Bati ve Zlíně
dc.description.sponsorship	[RVO excellent/MSM-RVO/FHS/2021/005]
dc.rights	Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rights.uri	https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rights.access	openAccess
utb.ou	Institute of Health Sciences
utb.ou	Research Center
utb.contributor.internalauthor	Kudlová, Pavla
utb.contributor.internalauthor	Kočvarová, Ilona
utb.fulltext.affiliation	Pavla Kudlová 1 , Ilona Kočvarová 2 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7070-7998 , Petr Soukup 3 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9241-6529 1 Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Faculty of Humanities, Institute of Health Sciences, Zlín, Czech Republic 2 Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Faculty of Humanities, Research Center, Zlín, Czech Republic 3 Charles University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology, Prague, Czech Republic Corresponding author: Pavla Kudlová, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Faculty of Humanities, Institute of Health Sciences, Štefánikova 5670, 760 01 Zlín, Czech Republic; e-mail: [email protected]\| www.fhs.utb.cz
utb.fulltext.dates	Submitted: 2021-07-31
utb.fulltext.references	1. ADA – American Diabetes Association (2019). Introduction: Standards of medical care in diabetes. Diabetes Care 42(Suppl. 1): S1–S2. DOI: 10.2337/dc19-SINT01. 2. Alhaiti AH, Alotaibi AR, Jones LK, DaCosta C, Lenon GB (2016). Psychometric evaluation of the revised Michigan Diabetes Knowledge Test in Arabic: Translation and validation. J Diabetes Res 2016: 9643714. DOI: 10.1155/2016/9643714. 3. AlShayban DM, Naqvi AA, Alhumaid O, AlQahtani AS, Islam MA, Ghori SA, et al. (2020). Association of disease knowledge and medication adherence among out-patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Khobar, Saudi Arabia. Front Pharmacol 11: 60. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00060. 4. Bergenstal RM, Tamborlane WV, Ahmann A, Buse JB, Dailey G, Davis SN, et al. (2010). Effectiveness of sensor-augmented insulin-pump therapy in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 363(4): 311–320. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1002853. 5. Beverly EA, Ritholz MD, Rennie RG, Mort SC (2019). A brief interactive training with medical students improves their diabetes knowledge about hypoglycemia. BMC Med Educ 19(1): 171. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-019-1615-x. 6. CDS – Czech Diabetes Society (2020). Doporučený postup péče o diabetes mellitus 2. typu: Česká diabetologická společnost. Revize ze dne: 31. 5. 2020. Za ČDS: Škrha J, Pelikánová T, Prázný M, Kvapil M. [online] [cit. 2021-01-28]. Available at: https://www.diab.cz/dokumenty/Standardy_DM.pdf 7. Chan MF, Zang Y-L (2007). Nurses’ perceived and actual level of diabetes mellitus knowledge: results of a cluster analysis. J Clin Nurs 16(7B): 234–242. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01761.x. 8. Chráska M (2016). Metody pedagogického výzkumu: základy kvantitativního výzkumu (2nd, updated ed). Praha: Grada, 256 p. 9. Christiansen MP, Klaff LJ, Brazg R, Chang AR, Levy CJ, Lam D, et al. (2018). A Prospective multicenter evaluation of the accuracy of a novel implanted continuous glucose sensor: PRECISE II. Diabetes Technol Ther 20(3): 197–206. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2017.0142. 10. Collins GS, Mughal S, Barnett AH, Fitzgerald JT, Lloyd CE (2011). Modification and validation of the revised diabetes knowledge scale. Diabet Med 28(3): 306–310. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.03190.x. 11. Davies MJ, D’Alessio DA, Fradkin J, Kernan WN, Mathieu C, Mingrone G, et al. (2018). Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes. A Consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care 41(12): 2669–2701. DOI: 10.2337/dci18-0033. 12. Drass JA, Muir-Nash J, Boykin PC, Turek JM, Baker KL (1989). Perceived and actual level of knowledge of diabetes mellitus among nurses. Diabetes Care 12(5): 351–356. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.12.5.351. 13. Fitzgerald JT, Funnell MM, Anderson RM, Nwankwo R, Stantsfield RB, Piatt GA (2016). Validation of the revised brief diabetes knowledge test (DKT2). Diabetes Educ 42(2): 178–187. DOI: 10.1177/0145721715624968. 14. Fitzgerald JT, Funnell MM, Hess GE, Barr PA, Anderson RM, Hiss RG, Davis WK (1998). The reliability and validity of a brief diabetes knowledge test. Diabetes Care 21(5): 706–710. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.21.5.706. 15. Furr RM (2018). Psychometrics: an introduction. 3rd ed. Sage publications, Los Angeles, p. 543. 16. Haugstvedt A, Aarflot M, Igland J, Landbakk T, Graue M (2016). Diabetes knowledge in nursing homes and home-based care services: a validation study of the Michigan Diabetes Knowledge Test adapted for use among nursing personnel. BMC Nurs 15: 40. DOI: 10.1186/s12912-016-0159-1. 17. Hollis M, Glaister K, Lapsley JA (2014). Do practice nurses have the knowledge to provide diabetes self-management education? Contemp Nurse 46(2): 234–241. DOI: 10.5172/conu.2014.46.2.234. 18. İdiz C, Çelik S, Bağdemir E, Dişsiz M, Satman İ (2020). Turkish adaptation of michigan diabetes research and training center’s revised diabetes knowledge test and determination of factors affecting the knowledge level of diabetic individuals [Diyabet araştırma ve eğitim merkezi revize diyabet bilgi testi’nin türkçeye adaptasyonu ve diyabetli bireylerin bilgi düzeyini etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi]. Turk J Endocrinol Metab 24(1): 38–46. DOI: 10.25179/tjem.2019-71974. 19. Kudlová P, Kočvarová I (2020). Knowledge and self-assessment of general practitioner nurses in the area of diabetes mellitus. Kontakt 22(3): 165–171. DOI: 10.32725/kont.2020.031. 20. Kudlová P, Chlup R, Zapletalová J (2017). The benefits of postgraduate therapeutic education in diabetology in the Czech Republic. In 3rd ICHHPSY – International Conference on Health and Health Psychology, European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences 30: 217–227. DOI: 10.15405/epsbs.2017.09.20. 21. Madae’en S, Elayeh E, Akour A, Al Qhaiwi T, Shaggour B, Madain R (2020). Diabetes knowledge, medication adherence, and glycemic control among diabetic patients: A cross-sectional study in Jordan. J Appl Pharm Sci 10(4): 41–46. DOI: 10.7324/JAPS.2020.104007. 22. Mandysová P (2019). Metody překladu a transkulturní validace zahraničních nástrojů [Methods of translation and transcultural validation of foreign instruments]. 1st ed. Pardubice: Univerzita Pardubice, Fakulta zdravotnických studií, 129 p. 23. Martinková P, Drabinová A (2018). Shiny item analysis for teaching psychometrics and to enforce routine analysis of educational tests. R J 10(2): 503–515. DOI: 10.32614/RJ-2018-074. 24. Orlando M, Thissen D (2000). Likelihood-based item-fit indices for dichotomous item response theory models. Appl Psychol Meas 24(1): 50–64. DOI: 10.1177/01466216000241003. 25. Ramjan LM, Watanabe H, Salamonson Y (2017). Diabetes knowledge and perceptions among nursing students, and curriculum differences in Japan and Australia: A crosssectional study. Nurse Educ Today 53: 7–12. DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.03.005. 26. Rhodes D, Visker J, Larson K, Cox C (2019). Rapid E-Learning for professional development in school-based diabetes management. Nurse Educ Pract 38: 84–88. DOI: 10.1016/j.nepr.2019.06.009. 27. Rubin DJ, Moshang J, Jabbour SA (2007). Diabetes knowledge: are resident physicians and nurses adequately prepared to manage diabetes? Endocr Pract 13(1): 17–21. DOI: 10.4158/EP.13.1.17. 28. Scheiderich SD, Freibaum CN, Peterson LM (1983). Registered nurses’ knowledge about diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 6(1): 57–61. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.6.1.57. 29. World Health Organization (2020). Country and regional data on diabetes. [online] [cit. 2021-01-28]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diabetes 30. Yacoub MI, Demeh WM, Barr JL, Saleh AM, Saleh MY (2015). Outcomes of a diabetes education program for registered nurses caring for individuals with diabetes. J Contin Educ Nurs 46(3): 129–133. DOI: 10.3928/00220124-20150126-02. 31. Yacoub MI, Demeh WM, Darawad MW, Barr JL, Saleh AM, Saleh MY (2014). An assessment of diabetes-related knowledge among registered nurses working in hospitals in Jordan. Int Nurs Rev 61(2): 255–262. DOI: 10.1111/inr.12090.
utb.fulltext.sponsorship	This paper is financed (translation, submission fees) by RVO excellent /MSM-RVO/FHS/2021/005 as part of the project “Variable factors influencing health and disease”. It is an internal grant within Tomas Bata University in Zlín designated for publishing research outcomes.
utb.wos.affiliation	[Kudlova, Pavla] Tomas Bata Univ Zlin, Fac Humanities, Inst Hlth Sci, Stefanikova 5670, Zlin 76001, Czech Republic; [Kocvarova, Ilona] Tomas Bata Univ Zlin, Fac Humanities, Res Ctr, Zlin, Czech Republic; [Soukup, Petr] Charles Univ Prague, Fac Social Sci, Dept Sociol, Prague, Czech Republic
utb.scopus.affiliation	Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Faculty of Humanities, Institute of Health Sciences, Zlín, Czech Republic; Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Faculty of Humanities, Research Center, Zlín, Czech Republic; Charles University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology, Prague, Czech Republic
utb.fulltext.projects	RVO excellent/MSM-RVO/FHS/2021/005
utb.fulltext.faculty	Faculty of Humanities
utb.fulltext.faculty	Faculty of Humanities
utb.fulltext.ou	Institute of Health Sciences
utb.fulltext.ou	Research Centre