The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Confidence in Diabetes Self-Care Scale
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE—To examine psychometric properties of the Confidence in Diabetes Self-Care (CIDS) scale, a newly developed instrument assessing diabetes-specific self-efficacy in Dutch and U.S. patients with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Reliability and validity of the CIDS scale were evaluated in Dutch (n = 151) and U.S. (n = 190) outpatients with type 1 diabetes. In addition to the CIDS scale, assessment included HbA1c, emotional distress, fear of hypoglycemia, self-esteem, anxiety, depression, and self-care behavior. The Dutch sample completed additional measures on perceived burden and importance of self-care. Test-retest reliability was established in a second Dutch sample (n = 62). RESULTS—Internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.86 for Dutch patients and 0.90 U.S. patients) and test-retest reliability (Spearman’s r = 0.85, P < 0.0001) of the CIDS scale were high. Exploratory factor analysis showed one strong general factor. Spearman’s correlations between the CIDS scale and other measures were moderate and in the expected directions, and high HbA1c levels were associated with low CIDS scores in the U.S. sample only. Low CIDS scores were positively associated with self-care but not with glycemic control in the original samples. CIDS scores in the U.S. and Dutch samples did not show any statistically significant differences. U.S. men had higher CIDS scores than U.S. women. CONCLUSIONS—The CIDS scale is a reliable and valid measure of diabetes-specific self-efficacy for use in patients with type 1 diabetes. High psychometric similarity allows for cross-cultural comparisons.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Perceived Stress was measured with the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; [70,71]). The PSS is a widely-used measure of psychological stress designed for community samples.”
From An online positive affect skills intervention reduces depression in adults with type 2 diabetes (2014) · cites this paper as [71]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x · Cited by 47,139
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1978) · Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4 · Cited by 10,586
(1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 5,872
Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes
(1991) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2013-0-07551-2 · Cited by 3,240
SPINHOVEN, P., ORMEL, J., SLOEKERS, P. P. A., KEMPEN, G. I. J. M., SPECKENS, A. E. M., & HEMERT, A. M. V. (1997) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291796004382 · Cited by 2,158
Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. (1991) · Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-590241-0.50008-3 · Cited by 1,833
Assessment of Diabetes-Related Distress
Polonsky, W. H., Anderson, B. J., Lohrer, P. A., Welch, G., Jacobson, A. M., Aponte, J. E., & Schwartz, C. E. (1995) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.18.6.754 · Cited by 1,497
Self-Efficacy, Adaptation, and Adjustment
Maddux, J. E. (1995) · The Plenum series in social/clinical psychology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-6868-5 · Cited by 830
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Weinger, K., Butler, H. A., Welch, G. W., & Greca, A. M. L. (2005) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.28.6.1346 · Cited by 352
Self-citationIANNOTTI, R. J., SCHNEIDER, S., NANSEL, T. R., HAYNIE, D. L., PLOTNICK, L. P., CLARK, L. M., SOBEL, D. O., & SIMONS-MORTON, B. (2006) · Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics · doi:10.1097/00004703-200604000-00003 · Cited by 305
The meaning and measurement of implementation climate
Weiner, B. J., Belden, C. M., Bergmire, D. M., & Johnston, M. (2011) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-78 · Cited by 260
Behavioral and Psychosocial Interventions in Diabetes
Peyrot, M., & Rubin, R. R. (2007) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc07-1222 · Cited by 247
The role of resilience on psychological adjustment and physical health in patients with diabetes
Yi, J. P., Vitaliano, P. P., Smith, R. E., Yi, J. C., & Weinger, K. (2008) · British Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1348/135910707x186994 · Cited by 233
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- van der Ven, N. C. W., Weinger, K., Yi, J., Pouwer, F., Adèr, H., van der Ploeg, H. M., & Snoek, F. J.
- Affiliations
- Department of Medical Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Joslin Diabetes Center (US)
- Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 2003-03-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 713-718
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- PMC
- PMC1615850
- OpenAlex
- W2076543844
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 2.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK42315, R01DK042315)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
- Keywords
- diabetes self-efficacy, type 1 diabetes, psychometric validation, scale reliability, scale validity, glycemic control, HbA1c, self-care behavior, cross-cultural comparison, Dutch patients, sex differences
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychometrics, Self Care, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Self Efficacy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
