Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Behavior Change Protocol for educational practices in Diabetes Mellitus
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.2908.3164Keywords:
Poder (Psicología; Educación en Salud; Promoción de la Salud; Estudios de Validación; Cuestionarios; Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2, Power (Psychology; Health Education; Health Promotion; Validation Studies; Questionnaires; Diabetes Mellitus Type 2Abstract
Objective
to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Behavior Change Protocol for educational practices in Diabetes Mellitus.
Method
methodological study aimed at cross-cultural adaptation, comprising the steps of translation, back-translation, assessment by an expert committee and pre-testing of the instrument on a sample of 30 healthcare service users with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
Results
the instrument was assessed based on criteria pertaining semantic, idiomatic, conceptual and cultural equivalence between the original instrument and the translated version, its mean Content Validity Index being 0.85.
Conclusion
results showed content validity indicating the instrument’s successful cross-cultural adaptation to the Brazilian culture for use in educational practices targeting self-care in type 2 DM.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.