| Literature DB >> 23573222 |
Xueyan Yang1, Shuzhuo Li, Marcus W Feldman.
Abstract
The objectives of this study are to develop a scale of gender role ideology appropriate for assessing Quality of Care in family planning services for rural China. Literature review, focus-group discussions and in-depth interviews with service providers and clients from two counties in eastern and western China, as well as experts' assessments, were used to develop a scale for family planning services. Psychometric methodologies were applied to samples of 601 service clients and 541 service providers from a survey in a district in central China to validate its internal consistency, reliability, and construct validity with realistic and strategic dimensions. This scale is found to be reliable and valid, and has prospects for application both academically and practically in the field.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23573222 PMCID: PMC3613413 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059919
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Gender Role Ideology from Various Scales.
| Scale | Underlying Concept | Construct | Authors |
| SRBS | Beliefs and attitudes toward the roles that maleand female should play in society | Single dimension | Kerr & Holden |
| SRIS | Ideology may be described as liberal, modern, feminist or egalitarian on the one hand, or as traditional orconservative on the other hand | At least two dimensions (traditionalism and feminism) are included in practical application | Kalin, Heusser & Edwards |
| AWS | Attitudes toward female’s role, rights andresponsibilities | Three dimensions: attitudes towards female roles, female rights, and female responsibilities | Spence & Helmreich |
| SRES | Attitudes towards the traditional and nontraditionalroles played by males and females in marriage, birth,employment, inter-personal and inter-sex relationship, education | Including two orders (formal and informal relationship) and five dimensions (marriage, reproduction, employment, inter-personal and inter-sex relationship, education) | King, et al. 1997 |
Development of GIS-family planning.
| Item | Originally Proposed 34 Items | Experts’ Assessed 26 Items | Statistically Validated 15 Items |
|
| |||
| 1 Contraception should only be women’s responsibility, and have nothing to do with men |
|
|
|
| 2 Gynecological diseases are women’s problems, and should not involve men |
|
|
|
| 3 The wife should be the first to be medically examined when a couple cannot procreate |
|
| |
| 4 Women should not make excessive demands of their husbands in sexual life |
|
|
|
| 5 It is shameful for menopausal women to consult about sexual issues |
|
|
|
| 6 Abortion services should not be provided for unmarried pregnant women, as it encourages immoral behaviors |
|
| |
| 7 Doctors’ discriminatory attitudes against unmarried pregnant girls in medical treatment are acceptable |
|
|
|
| 8 It is worth paying the social maintenance fee to give birth to a boy outside the birth quota |
|
|
|
| 9 It is not worth paying the social maintenance fee to give birth to a girl outside the birth quota |
|
|
|
| 10 In order to prevent transmission and spread of STDs, female STD patients’ personal informationshould be open to the public |
|
|
|
| 11 A wife who wants to have abortion should first get permission from her husband |
|
| |
| 12 Villages should be allowed to release information on women’s use of contraceptives to betterassist family planning |
|
| |
| 13 Villages should be allowed to release information on men’s sterilization to better assistfamily planning |
|
| |
| 14 It is not necessary to provide sexual knowledge to adolescents, as they will get to know it eventually. |
| ||
| 15 When choosing contraceptives, childbearing women should listen to suggestions fromservice providers |
| ||
| 16 Men should listen to suggestions from service providers, concerning whether to usecontraceptives and which to use |
| ||
| 17 It is acceptable that a family planning institution can only meet the needs of the majority of clients |
| ||
| 18 It is important for clients to get free condoms; whether condoms are comfortableis a secondary consideration |
| ||
|
| |||
| 19 Men should actively take responsibilities for contraception |
|
| |
| 20 A husband should be cooperative and supportive when his wife receives treatment forgynecological diseases such as reproductive tract diseases |
|
|
|
| 21 The husband should accompany his wife when she receives an induced abortion |
|
|
|
| 22 The husband should be cooperative and supportive to help his wife deal with menopausal problems |
|
|
|
| 23 The wife should help her husband enjoy a satisfying sexual life |
|
| |
| 24 A wife should be considerate of her husband when he has a disorder of sexual function dueto pressure from work or other things |
|
|
|
| 25 The husband should help his wife enjoy a satisfying sexual life |
|
|
|
| 26 Men should acquire as much sexual knowledge as they can |
|
|
|
| 27 Women should acquire as much sexual knowledge as they can |
|
|
|
| 28 It is not shameful for a man to see a doctor because of diseases of the reproductive orurological systems |
|
| |
| 29 Women should have the right to decide whether to abort a pregnancy |
|
| |
| 30 Contraceptives should be conveniently available and accessible to unmarried peopleregardless of their gender |
|
| |
| 31 Privacy of all clients, no matter what their gender or ages are (including those withvenereal diseases and sex workers), should be protected |
|
| |
| 32 Family planning institutions should meet the needs of childbearing women |
| ||
| 33 Family planning institutions should meet the needs of men |
| ||
| 34 Family planning institutions should meet the needs of all clients regardless of their gender or ages |
|
Note: Each item has a 5-point Likert response: (1) strongly agree (2) agree (3) neither agree nor disagree (4) disagree (5) strongly disagree.
Alpha Internal Consistency Coefficients for 15-item GIS-family planning.
| GIS-family planning | Men (422) | Women (720) | Service Clients (601) | Service Providers (541) | Total Sample (1142) |
| Realistic dimension | 0.72 | 0.73 | 0.68 | 0.69 | 0.73 |
| Strategic dimension | 0.74 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.73 | 0.73 |
| Total scale (15 items) | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.70 | 0.75 | 0.75 |
Factor Loadings for 15-item GIS-family planning.
| Item | M | SD | r | Loadings | |
|
| |||||
| Item 1 | 3.60 | 0.95 | 0.43 | 0.52 | |
| Item 2 | 4.02 | 0.78 | 0.47 | 0.44 | |
| Item 4 | 3.28 | 0.98 | 0.40 | 0.50 | |
| Item 5 | 3.72 | 0.82 | 0.44 | 0.45 | |
| Item 7 | 3.47 | 1.05 | 0.37 | 0.49 | |
| Item 8 | 3.70 | 1.07 | 0.39 | 0.52 | |
| Item 9 | 3.72 | 0.99 | 0.39 | 0.51 | |
| Item 10 | 3.15 | 1.22 | 0.30 | 0.50 | |
|
| |||||
| Item 20 | 4.22 | 0.72 | 0.35 | 0.33 | |
| Item 21 | 4.11 | 0.71 | 0.34 | 0.38 | |
| Item 22 | 4.16 | 0.57 | 0.40 | 0.31 | |
| Item 24 | 4.13 | 0.62 | 0.30 | 0.30 | |
| Item 25 | 3.89 | 0.68 | 0.28 | 0.30 | |
| Item 26 | 4.02 | 0.63 | 0.31 | 0.39 | |
| Item 27 | 3.99 | 0.66 | 0.25 | 0.38 | |
Note: t>1.96,
p<0.05; t>2.58,
p<0.01; t>3.29,
p<0.001; M is mean score, SD is Standard Deviation, r is corrected item-total correlations.
Fit of Indices of CFA for 15-item GIS-family planning.
| GIS-family planning |
| RMSEA | GFI | PGFI | NFI | IFI | CFI |
| One-factor model | 16.96 | 0.12 | 0.85 | 0.64 | 0.62 | 0.64 | 0.64 |
| Uncorrelated two-factor model | 7.30 | 0.071 | 0.93 | 0.70 | 0.81 | 0.83 | 0.83 |
| Correlated two-factor model | 6.83 | 0.064 | 0.94 | 0.70 | 0.84 | 0.87 | 0.87 |
Note: Χ2/df is the Normal Minimum Fit Function Chi-Square divided by Degrees of Freedom with threshold less than 2; RMSEA is Root Mean Square Error of Approximation with threshold less than 0.06; GFI is Goodness of Fit Index with threshold above 0.90, and PGFI is Parsimony Goodness of Fit Index with threshold above 0.50; NFI is Normed Fit Index with threshold above 0.90; IFI is Incremental Fit Index with threshold above 0.90; CFI is Comparative Fit Index with threshold above 0.90.
Discriminant Validity for 15-item GIS-family planning.
|
| df | |
| Undefined model | 509.69 | 89 |
| Defined model | 1526.54 | 90 |
| △Χ2 | 1016.85 |
Note: △Χ2 is the difference between theΧ2 of the defined model with CFA (in which the correlation coefficient between the two factors was defined as 1) and undefined model with CFA (in which the correlation coefficient between the two factors was undefined); △Χ2>2.71,
p<0.1; △Χ2>3.84,
p<0.05;△Χ2>6.64,
p<0.01; △Χ2>10.83,
p<0.001.