In this study, 268 individuals, who were older than 18 years and registered in a FamilyHealth Centre, were reached.Results: The result of the KMO test was determined to be 0.783 and that of Bartlett’s test 1002.772, and both were observed to besignificant at a level of p , 0.001.Conclusion: Our study determined that the Turkish version of the PATE has validity and reliability and can be used in Turkish society.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: This study was conducted for the purpose of adapting the Public Attitudes Toward Epilepsy Scale (PATE) for the Turkishcontext and determining its validity and reliability.Material and Methods: This is a methodological research and conducted in a family health centre located in the eastern Turkeybetween February 2018 and September 2018.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Aim: This study was conducted for the purpose of adapting the Public Attitudes Toward Epilepsy Scale (PATE) for the Turkishcontext and determining its validity and reliability.Material and Methods: This is a methodological research and conducted in a family health centre located in the eastern Turkeybetween February 2018 and September 2018.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study, 268 individuals, who were older than 18 years and registered in a FamilyHealth Centre, were reached.Results: The result of the KMO test was determined to be 0.783 and that of Bartlett’s test 1002.772, and both were observed to besignificant at a level of p , 0.001.Conclusion: Our study determined that the Turkish version of the PATE has validity and reliability and can be used in Turkish society.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters
Abstract
Aim: This study was conducted for the purpose of adapting the Public Attitudes Toward Epilepsy Scale (PATE) for the Turkishcontext and determining its validity and reliability.Material and Methods: This is a methodological research and conducted in a family health centre located in the eastern Turkeybetween February 2018 and September 2018. In this study, 268 individuals, who were older than 18 years and registered in a FamilyHealth Centre, were reached.Results: The result of the KMO test was determined to be 0.783 and that of Bartlett’s test 1002.772, and both were observed to besignificant at a level of p , 0.001.Conclusion: Our study determined that the Turkish version of the PATE has validity and reliability and can be used in Turkish society.
🔖
Cite This Article
AKTÜRK, Ü., AKALIN, Y. (2022). Turkish validity and reliability study of public attitudes towards epilepsy (PATE) scale. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 8, 2155–2160. https://ajindex.com/articles/446384
http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ epilepsy access date 24.12.2019 2. Bandstra NF, Camfield CS, Camfield PR. Stigma of epilepsy. Can J Neurol 2008;35:436-40. 3. Ay R. Epilepsi ve Damgalanma: Bir Gözden Geçirme. Klinik Psikiyatri 2017;20:129-36. 4. Suurmeijer TP, Reuvekamp MF, Aldenkamp BP. Social functioning, psychological functioning, and quality of, life in epilepsy. Epilepsia 2001;42:1160-8. 5. Şenol MG, Gün İ, Toğrol E, et al. Epilepsi hastalarında antiepileptik ilaç tedavisine uyumu etkileyen etmenler. Düzce Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2009; 11:21-31. 6. McEwan L, Taylor J, Casswell M, et al. Knowledge of and attitudes expressed toward epilepsy by carers of people with epilepsy: A UK perspective. Epilepsy Behav 2007;11:13-9. 7. Hanneke M, Mula M, Sander JW. The global burden and stigma of epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav 2008;12:540- 6. 8. Pazarcı NK, Yükselen NP, Aydın Ş, et al. Validation and reliability study of the turkish version of the stigma scale of epilepsy. Arch Neuropsychiatry 2017;54:295- 300 9. Degirmenci Y, Kabay SC, Yilmaz Z, et al. Perception of epilepsy in Turkey in the light of two different cities. Acta Clin Croat 2013 52:59-67. 10. Aydemir N. Familiarity with, knowledge of, and attitudes toward epilepsy in Turkey. Epilepsy Behav 2011;20:286-90. 11. Hirfanoglu T, Serdaroglu A, Cansu A, et al. Do knowledge of, perception of, and attitudes toward epilepsy affect the quality of life of Turkish children with epilepsy and their parents? Epilepsy Behav 2009;14:71-7. 12. Diamantopoulos N, Kaleyias J, Tzoufi M, et al. A survey of public awareness, understanding, and attitudes toward epilepsy in Greece. Epilepsia 2006;47:2154- 64. 13. Njamnshi AK, Yepnjio FN, Tabah EN, et al. Public awareness, perceptions, and attitudes with respect to epilepsy in Ebolowa and Sangmelima--Urban Cameroon. Epilepsy Behav 2009;14:628-33. 14. Saengpattrachai M, Srinualta D, Lorlertratna N,et al. Public familiarity with, knowledge of, and predictors of negative attitudes toward epilepsy in Thailand. Epilepsy Behav 2010;17:497-505. 15. Comrey AL, Lee HB. A First Course in Factor Analysis. 2nd edition. New York: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates, 1992:217. 16. Aker S, Dundar C, Pekşen Y. Olcme Araclarında İki Yaşamsal Kavram: Gecerlik ve Guvenirlik. O.M.U. Tıp Dergisi 2005;22:50-60. 17. Gozum S, Aksayan S. Kulturlerarası olcek uyarlaması icin rehber ii: psikometrik ozellikler ve kulturlerarası karşılaştırma. Hemşirelikte Araştırma Geliştirme Dergisi 2003;1:3-14. 18. Bo