| Literature DB >> 29390902 |
Talat Khadivzade1, Elham Arghavani1, Paymaneh Shokrollahi2, Masumeh Ghazanfarpour3, Hossein Kareshki4.
Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to assess the factorial structure of a Childbearing Questionnaire (CBQ). Using confirmatory factor analysis, it examined modified eight-factor models on a sample of 448 couples. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were 0.90 and 0.83 for positive and negative childbearing motivation, respectively, and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was in the range of 0.81-0.86, which indicated that the reliability of the questionnaire was high. The modified model was found to have 'adequate' fitness based on the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), but other indicators such as the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) and Comparative Fit Index (CFI) did not show any 'acceptable' fitness. In the eight-factor model, three factors with low loading were removed to achieve adequate fitness. Also, 13 correlated error terms were added to the modified model. The confirmatory factor analysis of the modified model showed 'adequate' fitness (CFI = 0.91, TLI =0.9, RMSEA = 0.06 and Chi-square to a degree of freedom ratio (χ2/df) = 3.49). This study supported the use of CBQ as a valid and reliable instrument of childbearing in engaged couples. Impact statement Current research on the subject: Some studies have suggested that the construct validity, internal consistency and the test-retest reliability of a Childbearing Questionnaire (CBQ) are high. The contribution made by the results of this study: It determined the reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability), the content validity and construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis) of the Persian version of the Childbearing Questionnaire. The implications of findings for clinical practice and further research: This reliable and valid instrument can be used for measuring the factors affecting childbearing motivations among engaged couples.Entities:
Keywords: Psychometric; childbearing; content validity; factor analysis; reliability
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29390902 DOI: 10.1080/01443615.2017.1379967
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol ISSN: 0144-3615 Impact factor: 1.246