Abstract
Abstract
Background
The rate at which mothers experience a cesarean section in the absence of medical signs is growing worldwide. Women’s beliefs and intentions play an essential role in the request or choice of a delivery method. At present, there is no comprehensive, validated scale for assessing pregnant women’s beliefs about cesarean section in the Iranian population. This study was performed to develop and assess the validity and reliability of the intention-based cesarean section scale using the theory of reasoned action (TRA) constructs as a theoretical framework for measuring intention toward the selection of a delivery method.
Methods
In this cross-sectional validation study, 480 pregnant women were recruited from Sari, in northern Iran, through a multistage random sampling approach. Content validity was examined using the content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR). Furthermore, both exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were applied to assess the construct validity of the developed scale. Reliability was measured by internal consistency and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Quality criteria for floor and ceiling effects were derived from existing guidelines and consensus within our research group.
Results
The results obtained from the factor analysis showed that the data were fit to the model (χ2 = 2298.389, P < 0.001). The TRA comprised 24 items assessing five domains, which described 62.46% of the common variance. The CFA showed a model with suitable fitness for the data. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the domains of the scale ranged from 0.609 to 0.843, and the ICC value ranged from 0.71 to 0.84, which is within the satisfactory range. The IR-TBICS scale had no floor or ceiling effect on the total score or any of the dimensions.
Conclusions
The belief-based cesarean section scale appears to be a reliable instrument. It is considered suitable and can be applied in other research in Iran.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Reference57 articles.
1. D’Souza R. Caesarean section on maternal request for non-medical reasons: putting the UK National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines in perspective. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27(2):165–77.
2. Lavender T, Hofmeyr GJ, Neilson JP, Kingdon C, Gyte GM. Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;2012(3):CD004660.
3. Zhang J, Troendle J, Reddy UM, Laughon SK, Branch DW, Burkman R, et al. Contemporary cesarean delivery practice in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(4):326.e1-e10.
4. Betrán AP, Torloni MR, Zhang J-J, Gülmezoglu A, Section WWGoC, Aleem H, et al. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG. 2016;123(5):667–70.
5. TorkZahrani S. Commentary: childbirth education in Iran. J Perinat Educ. 2008;17(3):51–4.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献