Preventive Health Management Self-Efficacy related to Premature Labor (PHMSE-PL) scale for Korean women of childbearing age: instrument development and validation
1
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: This study aimed to develop and examine the validity and reliability of a self-efficacy scale for preventive health management related to premature labor (PHMSE-PL) for women of childbearing age. Methods: Instrument development and validation were undertaken in three steps: conceptualization through a literature review and in-depth interviews, item generation and evaluation of content validity, and evaluation of construct validity and reliability. The content validity, factorial structure validity, and internal consistency reliability of the PHMSE-PL were evaluated, and cognitive interviewing was undertaken. Data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analyses, Cronbach's ⍺, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: The content validity was assessed by experts and was strengthened through cognitive interviews with women of childbearing age. The PHMSE-PL comprised 34 items across five factors. The construct validity of the PHMSE-PL was supported. Cronbach's ⍺ for the total scale was .97 (95% CI=.96-.97). Conclusion: An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the PHMSE-PL scale found it to be a valid and reliable tool for women of childbearing age. The scale appears to be useful for women of childbearing age to self-assess their preventive health management self-efficacy related to premature labor and for health professionals to evaluate and promote women's preventive health management.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to develop and examine the validity and reliability of a self-efficacy scale for preventive health management related to premature labor (PHMSE-PL) for women of childbearing age. Methods: Instrument development and validation were undertaken in three steps: conceptualization through a literature review and in-depth interviews, item generation and evaluation of content validity, and evaluation of construct validity and reliability. The content validity, factorial structure validity, and internal consistency reliability of the PHMSE-PL were evaluated, and cognitive interviewing was undertaken. Data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analyses, Cronbach's ⍺, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: The content validity was assessed by experts and was strengthened through cognitive interviews with women of childbearing age. The PHMSE-PL comprised 34 items across five factors. The construct validity of the PHMSE-PL was supported. Cronbach's ⍺ for the total scale was .97 (95% CI=.96-.97). Conclusion: An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the PHMSE-PL scale found it to be a valid and reliable tool for women of childbearing age. The scale appears to be useful for women of childbearing age to self-assess their preventive health management self-efficacy related to premature labor and for health professionals to evaluate and promote women's preventive health management.
참고문헌 (29)
- Chawanpaiboon S, "Global, regional, and national estimates of levels of preterm birth in 2014 : a systematic review and modeling analysis", Lancet Global Health, 7(1), pp.e37~e46 (2019)[DOI]
- "Birth statistics in 2020" (2021)[URL]
- Walani SR, "Global burden of preterm birth", International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 150(1), pp.31~33 (2020)[DOI]
- Beam AL, "Estimates of healthcare spending for preterm and low-birthweight infants in a commercially insured population : 2008-2016", Journal of Perinatology, 40(7), pp.1091~1099 (2020)[DOI]
- Speer RR, "Trends in costs of birth hospitalization and readmissions for late preterm infants", Children, 8(2), pp.127~ (2021)[DOI]
- Goldenberg RL, "Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth", Lancet, 371(9606), pp.75~84 (2008)[DOI]
- Romero R, "Preterm labor : one syndrome, many causes", Science, 345(6198), pp.760~765 (2014)[DOI]
- Griggs KM, "Preterm labor and birth : a clinical review", MCN, The American Journal of Maternal, 2020, pp.45(6), 328~337
- Silva TV, ""Preterm birth risk, me?"Women risk perception about premature delivery - a qualitative analysis", BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 21(1), pp.633~ (2021)[DOI]
- Lowe NK, "Maternal confidence for labor : development of the Childbirth Self-Efficacy Inventory", Research in Nursing and Health, 16(2), pp.141~149 (1993)[DOI]
- Chu KH, "Development and validation of the self-efficacy regarding vaginal birth scale", Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing : JOGNN, 46(1), pp.e13~e21 (2017)[DOI]
- Bandura A., "Self-efficacy: the exercise of control", pp.606~ (1997), Worth Publishers
- Williams DM, "The confounded self-efficacy construct : conceptual analysis and recommendations for future research", Health Psychology Review, 10(2), pp.113~128 (2016)[DOI]
- Hsieh HF, "Three approaches to qualitative content analysis", Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), pp.1277~1288 (2005)[DOI]
- Walts C, "Measurement in nursing and health research", pp.46~49 (2017), Springer Publishing Co
- Polit DF, "Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity?", Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing and Health, 30(4), pp.459~467 (2007)[DOI]
- Collins D, "Cognitive Interviewing Practice", pp.57~141 (2015), SAGE Publications Ltd
- MacCallum RC, "Sample size in factor analysis", Psychological Methods, 4(1), pp.84~99 (1999)[DOI]
- Kline RB, "Principles and practice of structural equation modeling", pp.268~298 (2015), The Guilford Press
- West SG, "Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling", pp.209~231 (2012), The Guilford Press
- Bae BR., "Mplus 7.0 structural equation modeling", pp.39~ (2016), Chungram Publishing
- Ryan P, "The Individual and Family Self-Management Theory : background and perspectives on context, process, and outcomes", Nursing Outlook, 57(4), pp.217~225.E6 (2009)[DOI]
- Liu T, "A concept analysis of self-efficacy among Chinese elderly with diabetes mellitus", Nursing Forum, 47(4), pp.226~235 (2012)[DOI]
- Patterson ET, "Symptoms of preterm labor and self-diagnostic confusion", Nursing Research, 41(6), pp.367~372 (1992)[DOI]
- Luszczynska A, "The general self-efficacy scale : multicultural validation studies", Journal of Psychology, 139(5), pp.439~457 (2005)[DOI]
- Lovén Wickman U, "Development of a self-care questionnaire for clinical assessment of self-care in patients with inflammatory bowel disease : a psychometric evaluation", International Journal of Nursing Studies, 89, pp.1~7 (2019)[DOI]
- Brown TA., "Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research", pp.461~ (2015), The Guilford Press
- Iacobucci D, "Advancing alpha : measuring reliability with confidence", Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, pp.478~487 (2003)[DOI]
- Yu B, "Self-efficacy as a crucial psychological predictor of treatment adherence among elderly people living with HIV : analyses based on the health belief model", AIDS Care, pp.1~7 (2021)[DOI]