Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the General Self-Efficacy Scale in Ugandan Community Health Workers.
Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the General Self-Efficacy Scale in Ugandan Community Health Workers.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s43477-022-00064-1
复制
发表时间：
2022-12
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Davis, J Lucian
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hennein, Rachel;Nanziri, Leah M;Musinguzi, Johnson;Ggita, Joseph M;Turimumahoro, Patricia;Ochom, Emmanuel;Gupta, Amanda J;Halder, Anushka;Katamba, Achilles;White, Marney A;Pietrzak, Robert H;Armstrong-Hough, Mari;Davis, J Lucian
自我效能是社区卫生工作者提供循证护理的能力和动机的核心;因此，需要有效的自我效能措施来评估社区卫生工作者计划的有效性。在这项研究中，我们采用多种方法在乌干达社区卫生工作者中对一般自我效能量表进行文化适应和评估。我们通过多学科研究团队内的跨文化讨论，从英语翻译成卢甘达语并翻译成英语，以及与社区卫生工作者的六次认知访谈，改编了十项一般自我效能量表。我们在一个阶段性的，两部分的横断面研究，包括147名社区卫生工作者的适应规模。探索性因素分析得出三个因素，我们标记为解决问题，坚持和足智多谋。该三因素解决方案具有良好的模型拟合（标准化均方根残差= 0.07），并解释了53.4%的方差。我们发现了收敛效度的证据，因为总量表的得分与经验年数（r = 0.48; p <0.001）和感知社会支持（r = 0.39，p <0.001）呈正相关。在单因素方差分析和Bonferroni校正的事后检验中，受教育程度较高的人得分也较高[F（2，72）= 9.16，p < .001]。我们还发现了判别效度的证据，因为总量表的得分与年龄无关（r =-0.07，p = 0.55），与文献显示的一般自我效能感是一个与年龄无关的结构一致。适应量表的内部一致性在初步研究的可接受范围内（Cronbach α = 0.61）。乌干达适应一般自我效能量表的评价表现出良好的心理测量特性，但是，更大的研究与重复的措施是必要的，以进一步评估适应规模的因素结构，有效性，可靠性和稳定性随着时间的推移。
Self-efficacy is central to community health workers’ capacity and motivation to deliver evidence-based care; thus, validated measures of self-efficacy are needed to assess the effectiveness of community health worker programs. In this study, we culturally adapted and evaluated the General Self-Efficacy Scale among community health workers in Uganda using multiple methods. We adapted the ten-item General Self-Efficacy Scale through cross-cultural discussions within our multidisciplinary research team, translation from English into Luganda and back-translation into English, and six cognitive interviews with community health workers. We administered the adapted scale in a staged, two-part cross-sectional study, including a total of 147 community health workers. Exploratory factor analysis yielded three factors, which we labeled problem-solving, persistence, and resourcefulness. This three-factor solution had good model fit (standardized root mean square residual = 0.07) and explained 53.4% of the variance. We found evidence of convergent validity, as scores for the total scale were positively correlated with years of experience (r = 0.48; p < .001) and perceived social support (r = 0.39, p < .001). Scores were also higher among those with higher educational attainment in one-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni-corrected post hoc tests [F (2,72) = 9.16, p < .001]. We also found evidence of discriminant validity, as scores for the total scale were not correlated with age (r = − 0.07, p = .55), in agreement with literature showing that general self-efficacy is an age-independent construct. The internal consistency of the adapted scale was within the acceptable range for a pilot study (Cronbach’s α = 0.61). This evaluation of a Uganda-adapted General Self-Efficacy Scale demonstrated promising psychometric properties; however, larger studies with repeated measures are warranted to further assess the adapted scale’s factor structure, validity, reliability, and stability over time.