Validity based on internal structure of the Kidney Transplant Understanding Tool – Brazil (K-TUT-BR)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21527/2176-7114.2025.50.15823Keywords:
Kidney transplantation, Health literacy, Health education, Chronic kidney disease, NursingAbstract
This study aimed to evaluate the evidence of validity based on the internal structure of the "Kidney Transplant Understanding Tool - Brazil" (K-TUT-BR). This is a methodological study with quantitative approach in which the data collection took place through the application of a sociodemographic/clinical questionnaire and K-TUT-BR. The participants were pre-transplant renal patients or outpatient follow-up transplants. The sample consisted of 300 patients. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee under Opinion number 5,939,285. The data were analyzed in the software FACTOR version - 12.04.01 and JASP version 0.17.3.0. Successive exploratory factor analyses were performed for the set of items, followed by analysis of variance of the items. In this study, a 4-factor model (F1, F2, F3 and F4) was found for 11 items of the instrument under test, with good adjustment indices. The parallel analysis recommended extraction of four factors as the most representative for the data, which revealed acceptable composite reliability (greater than 0.70) for F1 and F3 factors. The overall reliability of the instrument was also acceptable (CRC=0.660). Thus, the K-TUT-BR represents an important instrument to evaluate patients' knowledge about kidney transplantation.
References
1. Thurlow J, Joshi M, Yan G, Norris KC, Agodoa LY, Yuan CM, et al. Global Epidemiology of End-Stage Kidney Disease and Disparities in Kidney Replacement Therapy. Am J Nephrol. 2021;52(2):98–107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000514550
2. Mudiayi D, Shojai S, Okpechi I, Christie EA, Wen K, Kamaleldin M, et al. Global Estimates of Capacity for Kidney Transplantation in World Countries and Regions. Transplantation. 2022;106(6):1113–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000003943
3. Órgãos AB de T e. Dados Numéricos da doação de órgãos e transplantes realizados por estado e instituição no período janeiro-junho 2024. In: 1. Registro Brasileiro de Transplantes; 2024.
4. Maasdam L, Timman R, Cadogan M, Tielen M, van Buren MC, Weimar W, et al. Exploring health literacy and self-management after kidney transplantation: A prospective cohort study. Patient Educ Couns. 2022 Feb 1;105(2):440–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.05.013
5. Dahl KG, Wahl AK, Urstad KH, Falk RS, Andersen MH. Changes in Health Literacy during the first year following a kidney transplantation: Using the Health Literacy Questionnaire. Patient Educ Couns. 2021 Jul 1;104(7):1814–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.12.028
6. Rocha KT, Figueiredo AE. Letramento funcional em saúde na terapia renal substitutiva: revisão integrativa. Acta Paul Enferm [Internet]. 2020;33. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.37689/acta-ape/2020RI0124
7. Rocha KT, Figueiredo AE. Health literacy: Assessment of patients in renal replacement therapy. Enferm Nefrol. 2019;22(4):388–97. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4321/S2254-28842019000400005
8. Kang CM, Lee H. An integrative literature review of kidney transplantation knowledge tools. PLoS One [Internet]. 2023;18(1 January):1–14. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281073
9. Rosaasen N, Taylor J, Blackburn D, Mainra R, Shoker A, Mansell H. Development and Validation of the Kidney Transplant Understanding Tool (K-TUT). Transplant Direct. 2017;3(3):E132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000000647
10. Costa NF da CG, Mendes SR, Lessa O, Frazão CMFQ, Moraes KL, Sousa CN, et al. Adaptação e validação do Kidney Transplant Understanding Tool para o contexto brasileiro. Acta Paul Enferm. 2023;36(12):128–39. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.37689/acta-ape/2023AO01082
11. Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: A clear and user-friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011;17(2):268–74. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x
12. Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York ; London: The Guilford Press; 2015.
13. Forero CG, Maydeu-Olivares A, Gallardo-Pujol D. Factor Analysis with Ordinal Indicators: A Monte Carlo Study Comparing DWLS and ULS Estimation. Struct Equ Model A Multidiscip J. 2009;16(4):625–41.
14. Lee CT, Zhang G, Edwards MC. Ordinary Least Squares Estimation of Parameters in Exploratory Factor Analysis With Ordinal Data. Multivariate Behav Res. 2012;47(2):314–39.
15. Zhang G, Browne MW. Bootstrap Fit Testing, Confidence Intervals, and Standard Error Estimation in the Factor Analysis of Polychoric Correlation Matrices. Behaviormetrika. 2006;33(1):61–74.
16. Lorenzo-Seva U, Ferrando PJ. Not Positive Definite Correlation Matrices in Exploratory Item Factor Analysis: Causes, Consequences and a Proposed Solution. Struct Equ Model [Internet]. 2021;28(1):138–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2020.1735393
17. Kline, Rex B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York Guilford, 2011.
18. Hair, Joseph F, et al. Análise Multivariada de Dados - 6ed. Bookman Editora, 1 Jan. 2009.
19. Field, Andy. Descobrindo a Estatística Usando O SPSS - 2.Ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2009
20. Timmerman ME, Lorenzo-Seva U. Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychol Methods. 2011;16(2):209–20.
21. Ferrando PJ, Lorenzo-Seva U. Assessing the Quality and Appropriateness of Factor Solutions and Factor Score Estimates in Exploratory Item Factor Analysis. Educ Psychol Meas. 2018;78(5):762–80. DOI: https://doi.dox.org/10.1177/0013164417719308
22. Lorenzo-Seva U, Ferrando PJ. Robust Promin: A method for diagonally weighted factor rotation. Lib Rev Peru Psicol. 2019;25(1):99–106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24265/liberabit.2019.v25n1.08
23. Wu AD, Zumbo BD. Using Pratt’s importance measures in confirmatory factor analyses. J Mod Appl Stat Methods. 2017;16(2):81–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1509494700
24. Valentini F, Damásio BF. Average Variance Extracted and Composite Reliability: Reliability Coefficients. Psicol Teor e Pesqui. 2016;32(2):1–7. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0102-3772e322225
25. Bagozzi, Richard P, and Youjae Yi. On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. 1st ed., vol. 16, Stanford, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1988, pp. 74–94.
26. Ma H, Hu M, Wan J. Validation of the Chinese version of the kidney transplant understanding tool in Chinese patients. Nurs Open. 2023;10(5):2991–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1544
27. Abud D, Matos S, Rodrigues EC. Análise fatorial Metodologias Coleção. 2006. 1–75 p.
28. Valentini F, Damásio BF. Variância média extraída e confiabilidade composta: indicadores de precisão. Psicol Teor Pesq. 2016;32(2):1-7. doi:10.1590/0102-3772e322225.
29. Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:53–5.
30. Souza AC de, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello E de B. Propriedades psicométricas na avaliação de instrumentos: avaliação da confiabilidade e da validade. Epidemiol e Serv saude Rev do Sist Unico Saude do Bras. 2017;26(3):649–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5123/S1679-49742017000300022
31. de Boer S, Klewitz F, Bauer-Hohmann M, Schiffer L, Tegtbur U, Pape L, et al. Knowledge about immunosuppressant medication and its correlates in a german kidney transplant population – results of a ktx360° substudy. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020;14:1699–708. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S269201
32. Fuhrmann JD, Valkova K, von Moos S, Wüthrich R, Müller T, Schachtner T. Cancer among kidney transplant recipients >20 years after transplantation: post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder remains the most common cancer type in the ultra long-term. Clin Kidney J. 2022;15(5):1152-1159. doi:10.1093/ckj/sfac013.
33. Chandra A, Midtvedt K, Åsberg A, Eide IA. Immunosuppression and reproductive health after kidney transplantation. Transplantation. 2019;103(11):E325–33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000002903
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Andriel Tavares de Aquino, Natália Ramos Costa Pessoa, Ravana Amália Ribeiro Barreto, Niellys de Fátima da Conceição Gonçalves Costa, Mônica Maria Oliveira da Silva, Camila Francielly de Santana Santos, Katarinne Lima Moraes, Cecília Maria Farias de Queiroz Frazão
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
By publishing in Revista Contexto & Saúde, authors agree to the following terms:
The works are licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0) license, which allows:
Share — to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format;
Adapt — to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial.
These permissions are irrevocable, provided that the following terms are respected:
Attribution — authors must be properly credited, with a link to the license and indication of any changes made.
No additional restrictions — no legal or technological measures may be applied that restrict the use permitted by the license.
Notes:
The license does not apply to elements in the public domain or covered by legal exceptions.
The license does not grant all rights necessary for specific uses (e.g., image rights, privacy, or moral rights).
The journal is not responsible for opinions expressed in the articles, which are the sole responsibility of the authors. The Editor, with the support of the Editorial Board, reserves the right to suggest or request modifications when necessary.
Only original scientific articles presenting research results of interest that have not been published or simultaneously submitted to another journal with the same objective will be accepted.
Mentions of trademarks or specific products are intended solely for identification purposes, without any promotional association by the authors or the journal.
License Agreement (for articles published from September 2025): Authors retain copyright over their article and grant Revista Contexto & Saúde the right of first publication.
