The Fertility Belief Questionnaire: A Reliability and Validity Study Among a South African Sample.

IF 1 Q4 NURSING
Siphesihle Mhlanga, Florence Naab, Rizwana Roomaney
{"title":"The Fertility Belief Questionnaire: A Reliability and Validity Study Among a South African Sample.","authors":"Siphesihle Mhlanga, Florence Naab, Rizwana Roomaney","doi":"10.1891/JNM-2025-0155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background and Purpose:</b> Fertility beliefs shape decisions regarding family planning, reproductive health, and gender roles. However, there are limited psychometric tools measuring fertility beliefs in Africa. Thus, this study sought to assess the psychometric properties of the Fertility Belief Questionnaire (FBQ). <b>Methods:</b> Using a cross-sectional design, participants were recruited at two fertility clinics. We conducted reliability and factor analyses (confirmatory factor analysis [CFA] and exploratory factor analysis [EFA]) to establish the psychometric robustness of the FBQ in a South African sample. <b>Results:</b> The CFA indicated that the original five-factor structure of the FBQ was a poor fit for the current data (χ²[395] = 950.482; <i>p</i> = .000). EFA indicated an alternate 23-item FBQ consisting of five subscales, namely, consequences, hope for recovery, illness coherence, personal control, and impact. The composite scale demonstrated an acceptable reliability (α = .77). <b>Conclusions:</b> The resulting FBQ was diverted from the original 30-item FBQ. Further research should examine its test-retest reliability and convergent validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":16585,"journal":{"name":"Journal of nursing measurement","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of nursing measurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1891/JNM-2025-0155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Fertility beliefs shape decisions regarding family planning, reproductive health, and gender roles. However, there are limited psychometric tools measuring fertility beliefs in Africa. Thus, this study sought to assess the psychometric properties of the Fertility Belief Questionnaire (FBQ). Methods: Using a cross-sectional design, participants were recruited at two fertility clinics. We conducted reliability and factor analyses (confirmatory factor analysis [CFA] and exploratory factor analysis [EFA]) to establish the psychometric robustness of the FBQ in a South African sample. Results: The CFA indicated that the original five-factor structure of the FBQ was a poor fit for the current data (χ²[395] = 950.482; p = .000). EFA indicated an alternate 23-item FBQ consisting of five subscales, namely, consequences, hope for recovery, illness coherence, personal control, and impact. The composite scale demonstrated an acceptable reliability (α = .77). Conclusions: The resulting FBQ was diverted from the original 30-item FBQ. Further research should examine its test-retest reliability and convergent validity.

生育信念问卷:南非样本的信度和效度研究。
背景和目的:生育观念影响计划生育、生殖健康和性别角色方面的决定。然而,在非洲,衡量生育信念的心理测量工具有限。因此,本研究试图评估生育信念问卷(FBQ)的心理测量特性。方法:采用横断面设计,在两个生育诊所招募参与者。我们进行了信度和因素分析(验证性因素分析[CFA]和探索性因素分析[EFA]),以在南非样本中建立FBQ的心理测量稳健性。结果:CFA表明FBQ的原始五因子结构与当前数据拟合较差(χ²[395]= 950.482;p = .000)。EFA显示了一个备选的23项FBQ,包括五个分量表,即后果、康复希望、疾病一致性、个人控制和影响。复合量表具有可接受的信度(α = 0.77)。结论:所得FBQ与原来的30题FBQ有所不同。进一步的研究应检验其重测信度和收敛效度。
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
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: The Journal of Nursing Measurement specifically addresses instrumentation in nursing. It serves as a prime forum for disseminating information on instruments, tools, approaches, and procedures developed or utilized for measuring variables in nursing research, practice, and education. Particular emphasis is placed on evidence for the reliability and validity or sensitivity and specificity of such instruments. The journal includes innovative discussions of theories, principles, practices, and issues relevant to nursing measurement.
×
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
小红书