Translation and validation of the Japanese version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Aya Tezuka, Natsuko Hiroyama, Miwa Suzuki, Megumi Matsuoka, Caroline J. Hollins Martin, Colin R. Martin
{"title":"Translation and validation of the Japanese version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised","authors":"Aya Tezuka,&nbsp;Natsuko Hiroyama,&nbsp;Miwa Suzuki,&nbsp;Megumi Matsuoka,&nbsp;Caroline J. Hollins Martin,&nbsp;Colin R. Martin","doi":"10.1111/jjns.12569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised and evaluate its reliability and validity.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>After translating the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised into Japanese, we conducted an Internet-based cross-sectional study with 445 Japanese-speaking women within 2 months of childbirth. Of these, 98 participated in the retest 1 month later. Data were analyzed using the COSMIN study design checklist for patient-reported outcome measurement instruments. Content validity was evaluated through cognitive debriefing during the translation process into Japanese. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to verify structural and cross-cultural validities. For hypothesis testing, we tested correlations with existing measures for convergent and divergent validities, and for known-group discriminant validity, we made comparisons between types of childbirth. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach's α, and test–retest reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>For the Japanese-Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised, the established three-factor model fit poorly, whereas the four-factor model fit better. Full metric invariance was observed in both the nulliparous and multiparous groups. Good convergent, divergent, and known-group discriminant validities and test–retest reliability were established. Internal consistency observations were suboptimal; however for vaginal childbirth, the Cronbach's α of the total score was .71.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The Japanese-Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised is a valid and reliable scale, with the exception of internal consistency that requires further investigation. If limited to vaginal childbirth, research, clinical applications, and international comparisons can be drawn.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50265,"journal":{"name":"Japan Journal of Nursing Science","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japan Journal of Nursing Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jjns.12569","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised and evaluate its reliability and validity.

Methods

After translating the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised into Japanese, we conducted an Internet-based cross-sectional study with 445 Japanese-speaking women within 2 months of childbirth. Of these, 98 participated in the retest 1 month later. Data were analyzed using the COSMIN study design checklist for patient-reported outcome measurement instruments. Content validity was evaluated through cognitive debriefing during the translation process into Japanese. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to verify structural and cross-cultural validities. For hypothesis testing, we tested correlations with existing measures for convergent and divergent validities, and for known-group discriminant validity, we made comparisons between types of childbirth. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach's α, and test–retest reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient.

Results

For the Japanese-Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised, the established three-factor model fit poorly, whereas the four-factor model fit better. Full metric invariance was observed in both the nulliparous and multiparous groups. Good convergent, divergent, and known-group discriminant validities and test–retest reliability were established. Internal consistency observations were suboptimal; however for vaginal childbirth, the Cronbach's α of the total score was .71.

Conclusions

The Japanese-Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised is a valid and reliable scale, with the exception of internal consistency that requires further investigation. If limited to vaginal childbirth, research, clinical applications, and international comparisons can be drawn.

《出生满意度量表修订本》日文版的翻译和验证。
目的:本研究旨在开发日本版的出生满意度量表,并评估其信度和有效性。方法:在将《出生满意度量表》翻译成日语后,我们对445名2岁以内的日语女性进行了一项基于互联网的横断面研究 分娩数月。其中98人参加了复试1 一个月后。使用患者报告结果测量仪器的COSMIN研究设计检查表对数据进行分析。在翻译成日语的过程中,通过认知汇报来评估内容的有效性。进行了验证性因素分析,以验证结构和跨文化的有效性。在假设检验中,我们检验了与现有测量的收敛有效性和发散有效性的相关性,对于已知的群体判别有效性,我们对分娩类型进行了比较。使用Cronbachα计算内部一致性,并使用组内相关系数评估重测可靠性。结果:日本出生满意度量表修订后,三因素模型拟合较差,四因素模型拟合较好。在未出生组和多胎组中均观察到完全度量不变性。建立了良好的收敛、发散和已知的群体判别有效性和重测信度。内部一致性观察结果不理想;然而,对于阴道分娩,总分的Cronbachα为.71。结论:日本出生满意度量表修订版是一个有效和可靠的量表,但内部一致性需要进一步调查。如果仅限于阴道分娩,可以进行研究、临床应用和国际比较。
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
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Japan Journal of Nursing Science is the official English language journal of the Japan Academy of Nursing Science. The purpose of the Journal is to provide a mechanism to share knowledge related to improving health care and promoting the development of nursing. The Journal seeks original manuscripts reporting scholarly work on the art and science of nursing. Original articles may be empirical and qualitative studies, review articles, methodological articles, brief reports, case studies and letters to the Editor. Please see Instructions for Authors for detailed authorship qualification requirement.
×
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