Version 1
: Received: 27 December 2022 / Approved: 4 January 2023 / Online: 4 January 2023 (11:41:59 CET)
How to cite:
Kim, J. Validity and Reliability of the 23-Item Preterm Birth Risk Assessment Scale. Preprints2023, 2023010080. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0080.v1
Kim, J. Validity and Reliability of the 23-Item Preterm Birth Risk Assessment Scale. Preprints 2023, 2023010080. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0080.v1
Kim, J. Validity and Reliability of the 23-Item Preterm Birth Risk Assessment Scale. Preprints2023, 2023010080. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0080.v1
APA Style
Kim, J. (2023). Validity and Reliability of the 23-Item Preterm Birth Risk Assessment Scale. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0080.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Kim, J. 2023 "Validity and Reliability of the 23-Item Preterm Birth Risk Assessment Scale" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0080.v1
Abstract
AbstractPurpose: This study aimed to perform a psychometric evaluation of the preliminary preterm birth risk assessment scale (PBRAS-K) of 32-item. Method(s): There were 299 subjects, 167 in the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) group and 132 in the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) group, who delivered before 37+0 weeks after having preterm symptoms and were admitted to high-risk pregnancy maternal-fetal intensive care units (MFICU). After an item reduction process in EFA, the psychometric property scales were assessed using SPSS 26, and CFA was accomplished using AMOS 27. Results: The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure (KMO) and Bartlett’s χ2 test of sphericity confirmed the adequacy of the sample for factor analysis (KMO = .81 (> .80), χ2 = 1841.38, p < .001). The final version of the PBRAS-K was comprised of 23 items within seven dimensions. Factor analysis identified items explaining 65.9% of the total variance. The PBRAS-K had a mean score of 35.58 (±10.35) and showed a high internal consistency and satisfactory reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of .85. The PBRAS-K had a low correlation with risk scoring of preterm delivery (RPD) for discriminant validity (r = .45, p < .001), a positive, high correlation with the Somatic Awareness Scale with Spontaneous Preterm Labor (SPL-SAS) for criterion validity (r = .65, p < .001), and with pregnant stress for convergent validity (r = .57, p < .001). RPD and SPL-SAS were moderately correlated (r = .53, p < .001). Conclusion(s): The PBRAS-23-K is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing pregnant women’s risk of preterm birth. Clinical nurses are encouraged to apply and obtain information for effective interventions in MFICU. This scale has meaningful results and reflects the voices of women who had a preterm birth. The scale should be evaluated for standardization and cut-off scores using larger subject sizes in the future.
Keywords
Factor Analysis, Statistical; Premature birth; Psychometrics; Scale development
Subject
Medicine and Pharmacology, Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
