Premium
Validation of the short form of the chinese childbirth self‐efficacy inventory in Mainland China
Author(s) -
Gao LingLing,
Ip WanYim,
Sun Ke
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
research in nursing and health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.836
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1098-240X
pISSN - 0160-6891
DOI - 10.1002/nur.20400
Subject(s) - cronbach's alpha , intraclass correlation , confirmatory factor analysis , construct validity , mainland china , childbirth , clinical psychology , psychometrics , scale (ratio) , medicine , psychology , rating scale , structural equation modeling , china , pregnancy , developmental psychology , statistics , physics , mathematics , quantum mechanics , biology , political science , law , genetics
Self‐efficacy increasingly has been reported as an important outcome measure in childbirth care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometrics of the short form of the Chinese Childbirth Self‐Efficacy Inventory (CBSEI‐C32) in mainland China. A convenience sample of 297 pregnant Chinese women who were attending the out‐patient clinic of the study hospital in Guangzhou participated in the study. The participants were asked to complete the CBSEI‐C32, the Chinese Self‐Rating Anxiety Scale (CSAS), the Chinese Self‐Efficacy Scale (CSE) and the socio‐demographic questionnaire. A subgroup of 75 pregnant women was selected randomly from the total sample using a table of random numbers for test–retest reliability assessment. The findings demonstrate high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .96) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = .88) for the CBSEI‐C32. Confirmatory factor analysis showed some support for a two‐factor structure of the CBSEI‐C32, and construct validity was further supported by a significant relationship with CSAS. The CBSEI‐C32 has the potential to be used as a clinical and research instrument for measuring childbirth self‐efficacy in women in mainland China. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Res Nurs Health 34:49–59, 2011