Reliability and Validity of a Scale to Measure Public Health Nurses' Advocacy Practices in Italy. A validation study.

Igiene e sanita pubblica Pub Date : 2024-11-01
Vincenzo Damico, Andrea Ferri, Giuseppe Demoro, Luca Cossalter, Liana Murano, Antonella D'Alessandro, Lara Fermi, Margherita Milani, Giuseppe Russello, Giusy Cataldi, Viola Margosio
{"title":"Reliability and Validity of a Scale to Measure Public Health Nurses' Advocacy Practices in Italy. A validation study.","authors":"Vincenzo Damico, Andrea Ferri, Giuseppe Demoro, Luca Cossalter, Liana Murano, Antonella D'Alessandro, Lara Fermi, Margherita Milani, Giuseppe Russello, Giusy Cataldi, Viola Margosio","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Previous nursing studies have explored advocacy from several perspectives, including examining its definition, analyzing the concept, developing theory based on concept analysis, and developing scales to assess advocacy in practice. This study aims to determine the reliability and validity of a scale to assess the advocacy practices of public health nurses (PHNAP) working in extra-hospital and community settings in Italy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A validation study was conducted. After the translation phase, the questionnaire was administered to a convenience sample of nurses in various municipalities in Italy. Reliability was assessed by calculating the alpha coefficient. To assess construct validity, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted. Data was collected between November and December 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 457 questionnaires were analyzed. The overall Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.926, and factors 1 through 5 were 0.911, 0.812, 0.836, 0.869, and 0.895, respectively. Regarding the criterion-related validity results, the correlation coefficient between the total score and the score on the scale for the practical competence of PHNs in Italy exhibited a moderate correlation (r = 0.428; lt; 0.01). The scale comprised 27 items divided into five factors: \"Raising awareness of the challenging situation faced by disadvantaged individuals,\" \"Empowering disadvantaged individuals to improve their situation autonomously,\" \"Establishing a foundation in local governments and community groups of disadvantaged individuals for advocacy initiatives,\" \"Working toward policy changes,\" and \"Collaborating with stakeholders and organizations to enhance the effectiveness of activities.\" In the confirmatory factor analysis; that the chi-square degree of freedom ratio (χ2 /df), the goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the root mean square of approximate error (RMSEA), the value-added fitting index (IFI) and the comparative fitting index (CFI) were determined to be 2.765, 0.849, 0.065, 0.819 and 0.824, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The scale designed in this study is valid and reliable for use in the Italian context and it is applicable in various contexts where PHNs also support disadvantaged populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":73329,"journal":{"name":"Igiene e sanita pubblica","volume":"93 6","pages":"186-203"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Igiene e sanita pubblica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aim: Previous nursing studies have explored advocacy from several perspectives, including examining its definition, analyzing the concept, developing theory based on concept analysis, and developing scales to assess advocacy in practice. This study aims to determine the reliability and validity of a scale to assess the advocacy practices of public health nurses (PHNAP) working in extra-hospital and community settings in Italy.

Methods: A validation study was conducted. After the translation phase, the questionnaire was administered to a convenience sample of nurses in various municipalities in Italy. Reliability was assessed by calculating the alpha coefficient. To assess construct validity, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted. Data was collected between November and December 2024.

Results: A total of 457 questionnaires were analyzed. The overall Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.926, and factors 1 through 5 were 0.911, 0.812, 0.836, 0.869, and 0.895, respectively. Regarding the criterion-related validity results, the correlation coefficient between the total score and the score on the scale for the practical competence of PHNs in Italy exhibited a moderate correlation (r = 0.428; lt; 0.01). The scale comprised 27 items divided into five factors: "Raising awareness of the challenging situation faced by disadvantaged individuals," "Empowering disadvantaged individuals to improve their situation autonomously," "Establishing a foundation in local governments and community groups of disadvantaged individuals for advocacy initiatives," "Working toward policy changes," and "Collaborating with stakeholders and organizations to enhance the effectiveness of activities." In the confirmatory factor analysis; that the chi-square degree of freedom ratio (χ2 /df), the goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the root mean square of approximate error (RMSEA), the value-added fitting index (IFI) and the comparative fitting index (CFI) were determined to be 2.765, 0.849, 0.065, 0.819 and 0.824, respectively.

Conclusion: The scale designed in this study is valid and reliable for use in the Italian context and it is applicable in various contexts where PHNs also support disadvantaged populations.

意大利公共卫生护士倡导实践量表的信度和效度。验证性研究。
背景与目的:以往的护理研究从以下几个方面对倡导进行了探讨,包括对倡导的定义进行考察、对倡导的概念进行分析、在概念分析的基础上发展理论、对倡导的实践进行评估量表。本研究旨在确定一个量表的信度和效度,以评估在意大利医院外和社区环境中工作的公共卫生护士(PHNAP)的宣传实践。方法:进行验证性研究。在翻译阶段之后,问卷被管理到意大利各个城市的护士方便样本。通过计算alpha系数来评估信度。为了评估建构的效度,进行了探索性和验证性因子分析。数据收集于2024年11月至12月。结果:共分析问卷457份。总体Cronbach’s alpha系数为0.926,因子1 ~因子5分别为0.911、0.812、0.836、0.869、0.895。在标度相关效度结果中,意大利PHNs实践能力量表总分与得分的相关系数为中等相关(r = 0.428;lt;0.01)。该量表包括27个项目,分为5个因素:“提高对弱势群体所面临的挑战的认识”、“赋予弱势群体自主改善处境的权力”、“在地方政府和弱势群体社区建立倡导倡议的基金会”、“努力改变政策”、“与利益相关者和组织合作提高活动的有效性”。在验证性因子分析中;卡方自由度比(χ2 /df)、拟合优度指数(GFI)、近似误差均方根(RMSEA)、增值拟合指数(IFI)和比较拟合指数(CFI)分别为2.765、0.849、0.065、0.819和0.824。结论:本研究设计的量表在意大利的使用是有效和可靠的,它适用于phn也支持弱势群体的各种情况。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信