Trial Outcomes & Findings for Measuring the Priorities of Patients With Type II Diabetes Using Likert Scale and Best-worst Scaling (NCT NCT02637609)
NCT ID: NCT02637609
Last Updated: 2025-01-24
Results Overview
Average Likert score or best-worst score that measures the impact of each factor on diabetes self-management. Positive scores indicate facilitators for diabetes self-management while negative scores indicate barriers. The magnitude of the score suggests the degree of the impact. Both scales are on a +1--1 scale. Positive 1 would be the largest possible facilitator and a negative 1 would be the largest possible barrier.
Recruitment status
COMPLETED
Target enrollment
1103 participants
Primary outcome timeframe
One-time survey
Results posted on
2025-01-24
Participant Flow
The survey was conducted through GfK KnowledgePanel. Eligible members were invited by email to participate in the survey. All participants were required to be 18 years or older with self-reported physician-diagnosed type 2 diabetes and able to read English or Spanish. African Americans and Latinos were oversampled.
638 respondents (34%) did not respond to the survey and 139 people among those who responded (11%) were excluded based on the screening questions.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Likert Scale
Priority elicitation survey using a Likert scale method.
Likert Scale: Respondents receive questions asking them to rate each barrier or facilitator for diabetes self-management.
|
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1)
Priority elicitation survey using a best-worst scaling method.
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1): Respondents receive questions asking them to choose the best and worst factors that affect their diabetes self-management among a list of barriers and facilitators.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
549
|
554
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
549
|
554
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Measuring the Priorities of Patients With Type II Diabetes Using Likert Scale and Best-worst Scaling
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Likert Scale
n=549 Participants
Priority measured by Likert scale
Likert Scale: Respondents receive questions asking them to rate each barrier or facilitator for diabetes self-management.
|
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1)
n=554 Participants
Priority measured by Best-Worse Scaling (BWS)
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1): Respondents receive questions asking them to choose the best and worst factors that affect their diabetes self-management among a list of barriers and facilitators.
|
Total
n=1103 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
62.29 years
n=5 Participants
|
61.57 years
n=7 Participants
|
61.93 years
n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
263 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
290 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
553 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
286 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
264 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
550 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White, Non-Hispanic
|
287 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
288 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
575 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black, Non-Hispanic
|
126 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
128 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
254 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other, Non-Hispanic
|
12 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
11 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
23 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Hispanic
|
117 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
119 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
236 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
2+ Races, Non-Hispanic
|
7 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
15 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Region of Enrollment
United States
|
549 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
554 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
1103 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Education
Less than high school
|
44 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
38 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
82 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Education
High school
|
189 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
173 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
362 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Education
Some college
|
163 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
175 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
338 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Education
Bachelor's degree or higher
|
153 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
168 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
321 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Income
Less than $25,000
|
132 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
141 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
273 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Income
$25,000 - $49,999
|
156 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
152 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
308 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Income
$50,000 - $74,999
|
106 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
116 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
222 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Income
$75,000 and above
|
155 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
145 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
300 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Years of diagnosis
|
11.54 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.07 • n=5 Participants
|
11.17 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.99 • n=7 Participants
|
11.35 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.03 • n=5 Participants
|
|
Self-reported health
Excellent
|
35 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
25 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
60 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Self-reported health
Very good
|
170 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
146 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
316 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Self-reported health
Good
|
227 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
238 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
465 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Self-reported health
Fair
|
88 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
121 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
209 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Self-reported health
Poor
|
29 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
24 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
53 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
No. of hypoglycemic events in the past 6 months
None
|
279 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
292 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
571 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
No. of hypoglycemic events in the past 6 months
1 time
|
80 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
80 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
160 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
No. of hypoglycemic events in the past 6 months
2-5 times
|
147 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
131 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
278 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
No. of hypoglycemic events in the past 6 months
More than 5 times
|
43 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
51 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
94 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
No. of HbA1c level measured in past 6 months
None
|
30 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
42 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
72 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
No. of HbA1c level measured in past 6 months
1 time
|
243 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
249 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
492 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
No. of HbA1c level measured in past 6 months
More than 2 times
|
257 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
250 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
507 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
No. of HbA1c level measured in past 6 months
Don't know
|
19 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
13 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
32 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Most recent HbA1c level
Over 9.0%
|
23 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
35 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
58 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Most recent HbA1c level
Over 8.0% but under 9.0%
|
52 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
53 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
105 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Most recent HbA1c level
Over 7.0% but under 8.0%
|
149 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
148 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
297 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Most recent HbA1c level
Under 7.0%
|
242 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
218 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
460 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Most recent HbA1c level
Don't know
|
83 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
100 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
183 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Type of diabetes medicine used
No prescription medicine
|
52 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
47 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
99 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Type of diabetes medicine used
Only pills
|
333 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
333 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
666 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Type of diabetes medicine used
Only injections/shots
|
48 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
42 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
90 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Type of diabetes medicine used
Pills and injections/shots
|
115 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
131 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
246 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Type of diabetes medicine used
Refused
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Complications
Yes
|
233 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
230 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
463 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Complications
No
|
316 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
324 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
640 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Other chronic conditions
Yes
|
451 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
470 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
921 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Other chronic conditions
No
|
98 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
84 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
182 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: One-time surveyPopulation: Respondents who completed the survey.
Average Likert score or best-worst score that measures the impact of each factor on diabetes self-management. Positive scores indicate facilitators for diabetes self-management while negative scores indicate barriers. The magnitude of the score suggests the degree of the impact. Both scales are on a +1--1 scale. Positive 1 would be the largest possible facilitator and a negative 1 would be the largest possible barrier.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Likert Scale
n=549 Participants
Priority measured by 5-point Likert scale
Likert Scale: Respondents receive questions asking them to rate each barrier or facilitator for diabetes self-management.
|
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1)
n=554 Participants
Priority measured by best-worst scaling
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1): Respondents receive questions asking them to choose the best and worst factors that affect their diabetes self-management among a list of barriers and facilitators.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Healthcare providers
|
0.505 units on a scale
Interval 0.433 to 0.577
|
0.327 units on a scale
Interval 0.306 to 0.349
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
My own knowledge
|
0.500 units on a scale
Interval 0.437 to 0.563
|
0.369 units on a scale
Interval 0.346 to 0.392
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Access to healthy food
|
0.439 units on a scale
Interval 0.367 to 0.51
|
0.211 units on a scale
Interval 0.187 to 0.235
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Support from others
|
0.359 units on a scale
Interval 0.291 to 0.426
|
0.058 units on a scale
Interval 0.035 to 0.08
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Staying motivated
|
0.344 units on a scale
Interval 0.264 to 0.424
|
0.019 units on a scale
Interval -0.009 to 0.048
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Family commitments
|
0.293 units on a scale
Interval 0.22 to 0.366
|
0.002 units on a scale
Interval -0.018 to 0.022
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Physical environment
|
0.287 units on a scale
Interval 0.215 to 0.358
|
-0.079 units on a scale
Interval -0.1 to -0.059
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
My ability to pay
|
0.207 units on a scale
Interval 0.119 to 0.295
|
-0.166 units on a scale
Interval -0.189 to -0.143
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Local events
|
0.087 units on a scale
Interval 0.029 to 0.145
|
-0.236 units on a scale
Interval -0.255 to -0.217
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Work commitments
|
0.082 units on a scale
Interval 0.011 to 0.153
|
-0.217 units on a scale
Interval -0.235 to -0.199
|
|
Priority Scores for Potential Barriers and Facilitators for Diabetes Self-management
Other health conditions
|
0.067 units on a scale
Interval -0.013 to 0.147
|
-0.281 units on a scale
Interval -0.303 to -0.259
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: One-time surveyPopulation: Respondents who completed the survey.
Questions that asked respondents to evaluate whether it was easy to understand and answer the Likert scale or BWS tasks.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Likert Scale
n=549 Participants
Priority measured by 5-point Likert scale
Likert Scale: Respondents receive questions asking them to rate each barrier or facilitator for diabetes self-management.
|
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1)
n=554 Participants
Priority measured by best-worst scaling
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1): Respondents receive questions asking them to choose the best and worst factors that affect their diabetes self-management among a list of barriers and facilitators.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
My answers are consistent with my preferences · Strongly agree
|
130 Participants
|
99 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to understand the questions · Strongly disagree
|
10 Participants
|
26 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to understand the questions · Disagree
|
23 Participants
|
90 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to understand the questions · Neither agree nor disagree
|
73 Participants
|
141 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to understand the questions · Agree
|
316 Participants
|
224 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to understand the questions · Strongly agree
|
122 Participants
|
71 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to understand the questions · Refused
|
5 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to answer all the questions · Strongly disagree
|
9 Participants
|
34 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to answer all the questions · Disagree
|
33 Participants
|
97 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to answer all the questions · Neither agree nor disagree
|
71 Participants
|
160 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to answer all the questions · Agree
|
317 Participants
|
196 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to answer all the questions · Strongly agree
|
113 Participants
|
66 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
I found it easy to answer all the questions · Refused
|
6 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
My answers are consistent with my preferences · Strongly disagree
|
6 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
My answers are consistent with my preferences · Disagree
|
8 Participants
|
13 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
My answers are consistent with my preferences · Neither agree nor disagree
|
61 Participants
|
130 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
My answers are consistent with my preferences · Agree
|
338 Participants
|
306 Participants
|
|
Self-reported Difficulty in Understanding and Answering the Survey Questions
My answers are consistent with my preferences · Refused
|
6 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
Adverse Events
Likert Scale
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Best-Worst Scaling (Case 1)
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
John FP Bridges
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Phone: 614-685-2543
Email: [email protected]
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place