[Development and validation of the University of Tokyo Occupational Mental Health leadership checklist among occupational health specialists].

Q4 Medicine
Asuka Sakuraya, Kanami Tsuno, Akiomi Inoue, Yasumasa Otsuka, Hisashi Eguchi, Kazuhiro Watanabe, Yuki Arakawa, Norito Kawakami, Yuka Kobayashi
{"title":"[Development and validation of the University of Tokyo Occupational Mental Health leadership checklist among occupational health specialists].","authors":"Asuka Sakuraya, Kanami Tsuno, Akiomi Inoue, Yasumasa Otsuka, Hisashi Eguchi, Kazuhiro Watanabe, Yuki Arakawa, Norito Kawakami, Yuka Kobayashi","doi":"10.1539/sangyoeisei.2022-015-E","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Recently, occupational health specialists (OHS) are expected to exert leadership to develop high-quality occupational health activities. This study aimed to develop and investigate the reliability and validity of a scale to measure leadership preparation among OHS (The University of Tokyo Occupational Mental Health [TOMH] Leadership Checklist; TLC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on literature reviews and interviews among OHS, we created potential items consisting of 54 items with six factors (10 items for self-awareness, 10 items for situational awareness, 9 items for vision, 12 items for mindset, 3 items for performance of one's duties, and 10 items for relationship-building). An online survey was conducted with 300 OHS in Japan to verify the scale's reliability and validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Consequent to the exploratory factor analysis, using the principal factor method and promax rotation, 51 items across the following five factors were identified; \"self-awareness\", \"situational awareness\", \"vision\", \"mindset\", and \"performance of one's duties\". The confirmatory factor analysis showed good fit indices; CFI = 0.877, SRMR = 0.050, and RMSEA = 0.072. Cronbach's α ranged from 0.93-0.96. Additionally, the scores of the TLC were significantly positively correlated with work engagement, job satisfaction, and self-efficacy; contrastingly, they were significantly negatively correlated with psychological distress (p < .05). Furthermore, the participants who had experience leadership without authority indicated significantly higher scores of the TLC and its subscales than those who did not (p < .001).</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusions: </strong>The newly developed TLC appeared to have acceptable levels of reliability and validity. It would be beneficial for OHS to show good leadership.</p>","PeriodicalId":40039,"journal":{"name":"Sangyo eiseigaku zasshi = Journal of occupational health","volume":" ","pages":"31-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sangyo eiseigaku zasshi = Journal of occupational health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1539/sangyoeisei.2022-015-E","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Recently, occupational health specialists (OHS) are expected to exert leadership to develop high-quality occupational health activities. This study aimed to develop and investigate the reliability and validity of a scale to measure leadership preparation among OHS (The University of Tokyo Occupational Mental Health [TOMH] Leadership Checklist; TLC).

Methods: Based on literature reviews and interviews among OHS, we created potential items consisting of 54 items with six factors (10 items for self-awareness, 10 items for situational awareness, 9 items for vision, 12 items for mindset, 3 items for performance of one's duties, and 10 items for relationship-building). An online survey was conducted with 300 OHS in Japan to verify the scale's reliability and validity.

Results: Consequent to the exploratory factor analysis, using the principal factor method and promax rotation, 51 items across the following five factors were identified; "self-awareness", "situational awareness", "vision", "mindset", and "performance of one's duties". The confirmatory factor analysis showed good fit indices; CFI = 0.877, SRMR = 0.050, and RMSEA = 0.072. Cronbach's α ranged from 0.93-0.96. Additionally, the scores of the TLC were significantly positively correlated with work engagement, job satisfaction, and self-efficacy; contrastingly, they were significantly negatively correlated with psychological distress (p < .05). Furthermore, the participants who had experience leadership without authority indicated significantly higher scores of the TLC and its subscales than those who did not (p < .001).

Discussion and conclusions: The newly developed TLC appeared to have acceptable levels of reliability and validity. It would be beneficial for OHS to show good leadership.

[东京大学职业心理健康领导力检查表在职业健康专家中的开发与验证]。
目的:最近,人们期望职业健康专家(OHS)发挥领导力,开展高质量的职业健康活动。本研究旨在开发并调查一个量表(东京大学职业心理健康[TOMH]领导力核对表;TLC)的信度和效度,以衡量职业健康专家的领导力准备情况:根据文献综述和对 OHS 的访谈,我们创建了由 54 个项目组成的潜在项目,其中包含 6 个因子(自我意识 10 个项目、情境意识 10 个项目、愿景 9 个项目、心态 12 个项目、履行职责 3 个项目和建立关系 10 个项目)。为了验证量表的信度和效度,对日本的 300 名职业健康安全人员进行了在线调查:通过探索性因子分析,使用主因子法和 Promax 旋转法,确定了以下五个因子中的 51 个项目:"自我意识"、"情境意识"、"愿景"、"心态 "和 "履行职责"。确认性因子分析显示出良好的拟合指数:CFI = 0.877,SRMR = 0.050,RMSEA = 0.072。Cronbach's α 介于 0.93-0.96 之间。此外,TLC 分数与工作投入度、工作满意度和自我效能感呈显著正相关;相反,与心理困扰呈显著负相关(p < .05)。此外,经历过无权威领导的受试者在 TLC 及其分量表中的得分明显高于没有经历过的受试者(P < .001):新开发的 TLC 似乎具有可接受的信度和效度。对于职业健康与安全而言,展现良好的领导力将大有裨益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信