Psychometric properties of the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey–Revised among Dutch adults with type 1 diabetes and implications for clinical use

Abstract Aims Disordered eating behaviour (DEB) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) can be screened with the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey–Revised (DEPS‐R). This study aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the DEPS‐R among Dutch adults with T1D and to explore the individual items alongside the standard cut‐off score of ≥20 for clinical use. Methods The construct validity of the DEPS‐R was assessed with an exploratory factor analysis, through principal axis factoring and with Spearman correlations between clinical variables and the DEPS‐R. Backward logistic regression identified... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Embaye, Jiska
Hennekes, Mareille
Snoek, Frank
de Wit, Maartje
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2024
Reihe/Periodikum: Diabetic Medicine ; volume 41, issue 5 ; ISSN 0742-3071 1464-5491
Verlag/Hrsg.: Wiley
Schlagwörter: Endocrinology / Diabetes and Metabolism / Internal Medicine
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-27079978
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dme.15313

Abstract Aims Disordered eating behaviour (DEB) in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) can be screened with the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey–Revised (DEPS‐R). This study aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the DEPS‐R among Dutch adults with T1D and to explore the individual items alongside the standard cut‐off score of ≥20 for clinical use. Methods The construct validity of the DEPS‐R was assessed with an exploratory factor analysis, through principal axis factoring and with Spearman correlations between clinical variables and the DEPS‐R. Backward logistic regression identified clinical predictors for DEPS‐R scores above the cut‐off. DEPS‐R item responses were summarized with frequencies, means and standard deviations. Results Participants were 145 adults with T1D, of whom 79.3% were women and 35.9% presented with DEB based on the cut‐off. A single‐factor solution of the DEPS‐R showed good internal consistency, while a three‐factor solution showed acceptable to good internal consistency within the factors. A younger age, a higher BMI and more diabetes distress were predictors for a DEPS‐R cut‐off score of ≥20. Clinically relevant items were identified that contributed minimally to the DEPS‐R score. Conclusions This study supports a single‐factor and a three‐factor structure of the DEPS‐R while also suggesting an item‐specific or factor‐specific approach in clinical practice.