Validation of the Slade Fear of Childbirth Scale for Pregnancy in a Sample of Iranian Women: A Crosssectional Study

IF 0.2 Q4 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Shahrzad Sanjari, Azita Amir Fakhraei, Mohammad Reza Mohammidi Soleimani, K. Alidousti
{"title":"Validation of the Slade Fear of Childbirth Scale for Pregnancy in a Sample of Iranian Women: A Crosssectional Study","authors":"Shahrzad Sanjari, Azita Amir Fakhraei, Mohammad Reza Mohammidi Soleimani, K. Alidousti","doi":"10.34172/cjmb.2022.24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: The existence of a valid scale of fear of childbirth (FOC) has an effective role in identifying women at risk, so this study was conducted to determine the validation of the Slade FOC scale for pregnancy in a sample of Iranian women. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, initially, the Slade scale was translated based on a forward-backward approach. For sampling among pregnant women in Anbarabad city, 820 pregnant women were selected by multistage cluster sampling method. The research questionnaire included (a) demographic information, (b) Slade FOC scale (new scale), (c) childbirth attitude questionnaire (validated scale), and (d) Wijma scale (validated scale). Face validity, content validity, construct validity (using factor analysis), convergent validity, and concurrent validity (by calculating the present scale correlation with childbirth attitude questionnaire and Wijma scale were used to determine the validity of the scale. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), split-half, and stability (test-retest) methods were used for scale reliability. SPSS software version 22 and LISREL version 8.8 were used for data analysis. Results: Target population comments were applied in face validity, the impact score of face validity was in the range of 1.6-4.5. Content validity ratio (CVR) values (81%-100%) and content validity index (CVI) value (83%) were acceptable. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) showed that the scale had four factors which include uncertainty and injury with 18.39%, the unprofessional behavior of maternity staff with 14.51%, the unpredictable with 14.44%, and negative emotions with 10.54% of the variance. The scale had acceptable convergent validity and the correlation between items and the total score was between 0.41-0.63. The correlation coefficient between the present scale with the childbirth attitude questionnaire and Wijma scale was 0.81 and 0.79, respectively. The reliability result showed an acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84), acceptable split-half (0.71 for the first half of scale and 0.78 for the second half of scale) and acceptable stability (r = 0.78). Conclusions: The results showed that the Slade scale has acceptable validity and reliability. Therefore, this scale can be used in scientific research and screening for FOC.","PeriodicalId":43540,"journal":{"name":"Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/cjmb.2022.24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objectives: The existence of a valid scale of fear of childbirth (FOC) has an effective role in identifying women at risk, so this study was conducted to determine the validation of the Slade FOC scale for pregnancy in a sample of Iranian women. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, initially, the Slade scale was translated based on a forward-backward approach. For sampling among pregnant women in Anbarabad city, 820 pregnant women were selected by multistage cluster sampling method. The research questionnaire included (a) demographic information, (b) Slade FOC scale (new scale), (c) childbirth attitude questionnaire (validated scale), and (d) Wijma scale (validated scale). Face validity, content validity, construct validity (using factor analysis), convergent validity, and concurrent validity (by calculating the present scale correlation with childbirth attitude questionnaire and Wijma scale were used to determine the validity of the scale. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), split-half, and stability (test-retest) methods were used for scale reliability. SPSS software version 22 and LISREL version 8.8 were used for data analysis. Results: Target population comments were applied in face validity, the impact score of face validity was in the range of 1.6-4.5. Content validity ratio (CVR) values (81%-100%) and content validity index (CVI) value (83%) were acceptable. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) showed that the scale had four factors which include uncertainty and injury with 18.39%, the unprofessional behavior of maternity staff with 14.51%, the unpredictable with 14.44%, and negative emotions with 10.54% of the variance. The scale had acceptable convergent validity and the correlation between items and the total score was between 0.41-0.63. The correlation coefficient between the present scale with the childbirth attitude questionnaire and Wijma scale was 0.81 and 0.79, respectively. The reliability result showed an acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84), acceptable split-half (0.71 for the first half of scale and 0.78 for the second half of scale) and acceptable stability (r = 0.78). Conclusions: The results showed that the Slade scale has acceptable validity and reliability. Therefore, this scale can be used in scientific research and screening for FOC.
在伊朗妇女样本中验证斯莱德分娩恐惧量表:一项横断面研究
目的:存在一种有效的分娩恐惧量表(FOC)在识别有风险的妇女方面具有有效的作用,因此本研究旨在确定Slade FOC量表在伊朗妇女样本中的有效性。材料和方法:在这项横断面研究中,最初,Slade量表是基于向前向后的方法进行翻译的。采用多阶段整群抽样的方法,在安巴拉巴德市孕妇中抽取820名孕妇进行抽样。研究问卷包括(a)人口统计信息,(b) Slade FOC量表(新量表),(c)分娩态度问卷(有效量表),(d) Wijma量表(有效量表)。采用面效度、内容效度、构念效度(采用因子分析)、收敛效度、并发效度(通过计算当前量表与分娩态度问卷的相关性)和Wijma量表来确定量表的效度。量表信度采用内部一致性(Cronbach’s alpha)、分裂-二分法和稳定性(test-retest)方法。采用SPSS软件22版和LISREL软件8.8版进行数据分析。结果:目标人群评价被应用于面部效度,面部效度影响得分在1.6 ~ 4.5之间。内容效度比(CVR)值(81% ~ 100%)和内容效度指数(CVI)值(83%)可接受。探索性因子分析(EFA)显示,量表有4个因素,其中不确定因素和伤害因素占18.39%,产妇不专业行为因素占14.51%,不可预测因素占14.44%,消极情绪因素占10.54%。量表具有较好的收敛效度,各条目与总分的相关系数在0.41 ~ 0.63之间。本量表与分娩态度问卷、Wijma量表的相关系数分别为0.81、0.79。信度结果显示可接受的内部一致性(Cronbach 's alpha = 0.84),可接受的半分性(量表前半部分为0.71,后半部分为0.78)和可接受的稳定性(r = 0.78)。结论:斯莱德量表具有可接受的效度和信度。因此,该量表可用于FOC的科学研究和筛选。
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
25.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: All kind of knowledge contributing to the development of science by its content, value, level and originality will be covered by CJMB. Problems of public health and their solutions are at the head of the windows opening us to the world. The "Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences" is a modern forum for scientific communication,coveringall aspects medical sciences and biological sciences, in basic and clinical sciences, mainly including: • Anatomy • Antioxidant Therapy in Reproduction Medicine • Biochemistry • Biophysics • Breast Cancer • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine • Cell Biology • Dentistry sciences • Diabetes • Embryology • Endocrinology • Genetics • Hematology • Herbal Medicine • Histology • Internal Medicine • Internal Medicine, surgery • Medical Education • Medical Laboratory Sciences • Medical Microbiology • Microbiology • Mycology, Neurosciences • Nerosciences • Nutrition • Oncology • Parasitology • Pathology • Pharmacognosy • Pharmacology • Psychiatry • Sex-Based Biology • Sports Medicine • Urogynecology • Virology
×
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