Content validity of the illness perceptions questionnaire - revised among people with type 2 diabetes: A think-aloud study

Noleen K. McCorry, Laura Scullion, Claire M. McMurray, Rebecca Houghton, Martin Dempster*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

19 Citations (Scopus)
1460 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives: To access the cognitions of adults with type 2 diabetes whilst completing items on the Illness Perceptions Questionnaire – Revised (IPQ-R). To determine whether these cognitions are congruent with the meaning of items and subscales as interpreted by researchers and clinicians using the IPQ-R and to identify the nature and extent of problems that individuals experience when completing the IPQ-R.
Design: Participants (n=36) were recruited from a primary care diabetes clinic and a hospital diabetes clinic. They were asked to complete the IPQ-R using a ‘think-aloud’ methodology.
Main Outcome Measures: Transcripts were analysed to identify instances where participants expressed problems with item completion, or where there was inconsistency between verbal and written responses.
Results: The most problematic subscales were those of ‘personal control’ and ‘consequences’.
Conclusion: Generally, participants found the IPQ-R unproblematic. However, participants had problems with the concept of ‘cure’ and ‘symptoms’ in the context of type 2 diabetes, and with the negative phrasing used in some items. These findings have important implications for the interpretation of IPQ-R scores, particularly when the IPQ-R is used as the basis for individualised interventions among people with type 2 diabetes.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)675-685
Number of pages11
JournalPsychology and Health
Volume28
Issue number6
Early online date19 Dec 2012
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Content validity of the illness perceptions questionnaire - revised among people with type 2 diabetes: A think-aloud study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this