Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Psychometric validation of stress and compliance scale for diabetes (SCSD) in Penang, Malaysia

S Wasif Gillani1 , Syed Azhar Syed S2, Diana Laila Rahmatillah3, Mirza Baig4

1School of Pharmacy, Monash University Sunway Campus, 47500, Bandar Sunway, Selangor; 2Discipline of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Malaysia; 3Faculty of Pharmacy, UTA’45 Jakarta, Indonesia, 4Unit of Clinical Pharmacy & Pharmacy Practice, Dubai Pharmacy College, Dubai.

For correspondence:-  S Wasif Gillani   Email: wasifgillani@gmail.com   Tel:+60355145882

Received: 19 May 2014        Accepted: 23 February 2015        Published: 26 April 2015

Citation: Gillani S, Syed S S, Rahmatillah D, Baig M. Psychometric validation of stress and compliance scale for diabetes (SCSD) in Penang, Malaysia. Trop J Pharm Res 2015; 14(4):701-705 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v14i4.20

© 2015 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To provide factorial analytical findings, and to construct validation and normative data for Malaysian diabetic patients in Penang.
Method: A population-based survey was conducted in Penang, Malaysia during Nov 2012 to March 2013. Cluster random sampling technique was employed for the selection of participants in the community. A total of 1924 diabetic patients of age ≥ 18 years (mean age = 39.51 years) were approached; 992 of them were female and 932 male. LISREL 8.30 program was used for assenting factor analysis. Chi-square (χ2)/df (degree of freedom) ratio, GFI (goodness of fit index), AGFI (adjusted goodness of fit index) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were used to evaluate the fit of the model (two-factor).
Results: Barlett’s test of sphericity was 1603.417 (p < 0.001) while Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.83. Varimax rotation was conducted with these two identified factors. Factor A integrated items 1, 2, 3, 6, 9 and 10, labeled as ‘Perceived Stress’ while Factor B contained items 4, 5, 7, 8 and labeled as ‘Perceived Compliance’. Item variance showed 45.73 % of accountability with Factor A and 13.43 % with Factor B. Mandatory factor analysis for the two-factor of Malaysian version of PSS yielded: GFIs  χ2 (39) = 127.846, p < 0.001, χ2/df= 4.1; GFI = 0.97; AGFI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.06 and CFI = 0.99.
Conclusion: SCSD-10 is a reliable tool for assessing stress and compliance among diabetics living in a society.

Keywords: Diabetes mellitus, Malaysia stress scale, Stress and compliance scale for diabetes, Stress, Validation, Factor analysis, Barlett’s test, Kaiser-Meyer-

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.6 (2023)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 49 (2023)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates