DataSheet1.pdf
The aim of this study was to develop a scale to assess the levels of specific self-efficacy in order to enhance adherence to a gluten-free diet and the life quality of celiac patients. Celiac disease is a chronic small intestinal immune-mediated enteropathy precipitated by exposure to dietary gluten in genetically predisposed people. The only treatment is a strict lifelong gluten-free diet. Within the framework of Social Cognitive Theory, expectation of self-efficacy is understood as the degree in which a person believes himself to be capable of performing a certain task (e.g., adhering to a gluten-free diet), a construct which has been widely studied in its relation with adopting healthy behaviors, but scarcely in relation to celiac disease. A validation study was carried out in various stages: preparation of the protocol; construction of the questionnaire and a pilot run with 20 patients; validation of the scale with 563 patients and statistical analysis. A 25-item scale was developed. Feasibility was excellent (99.82% of participants completed all the questions). Factorial analysis pointed to the existence of five factors that explained 70.98% of the variance with a Cronbach alpha of 0.81 for the scale overall and between 0.64 and 0.90 for each factor. The scale showed a Spearman's Rho coefficient of 0.279 with the General self-efficacy Scale. This easily administered scale provides good psychometric properties for evaluating specific self-efficacy of celiac patients in adhering to treatment. It seeks to be the first scale that provides not only a measurement of specific self-efficacy in celiac disease, but also to determine its levels for each of the areas as a first step toward designing interventions of self-management and empowerment programs to cope with the disease.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1001/jama.288.19.2469
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0738-3991(98)00087-1
- https://doi.org//10.3748/wjg.14.46
- https://doi.org//10.1093/ajcn/85.1.160
- https://doi.org//10.1177/109442810141004
- https://doi.org//10.1037/a0024583
- https://doi.org//10.1007/BF01204849
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.2044-8287.2012.02069.x
- https://doi.org//10.14306/renhyd.19.3.152
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.04053.x
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.12.021
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.comppsych.2014.05.015
- https://doi.org//10.1136/bmj.320.7234.526
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.phr.2004.04.002
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s10620-007-0055-3
- https://doi.org//10.1177/1742395313495572
- https://doi.org//10.1207/S15324796ABM2601_01
- https://doi.org//10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301346
- https://doi.org//10.3200/JRLP.139.5.439-457
- https://doi.org//10.1177/0013164406288171
- https://doi.org//10.1037/a0024509
- https://doi.org//10.1037/0278-6133.27.1(Suppl.).S54
- https://doi.org//10.2466/pr0.1982.51.2.663
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1365-277X.2005.00591.x
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S1071-9164(99)91549-X
Usage metrics
Read the peer-reviewed publication
Categories
- Psychology and Cognitive Sciences not elsewhere classified
- Applied Psychology
- Clinical Psychology
- Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Neuroscience and Physiological Psychology
- Organizational Behavioral Psychology
- Personality, Social and Criminal Psychology
- Gender Psychology
- Health, Clinical and Counselling Psychology
- Industrial and Organisational Psychology
- Psychology not elsewhere classified