4.2 Article

Brazilian version of the Perceived Stress Scale: translation and validation for the elderly

Journal

REVISTA DE SAUDE PUBLICA
Volume 41, Issue 4, Pages 606-615

Publisher

REVISTA DE SAUDE PUBLICA
DOI: 10.1590/S0034-89102007000400015

Keywords

aged; stress, psychological, diagnosis; aging, psychology; psychological tests; sensitivity and specificity; validity of tests; translating; Brazil; health of the elderly

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: To translate the Perceived Stress Scale into Brazilian Portuguese, and to assess its validity for measuring perceived stress of Brazilian elderly. METHODS: The scale was translated and tested in its full version including 14 questions and in a shortened version including ten questions. The whole translation process consisted of translation, back-translation and committee review. The translated version was applied, by means of interview, to 76 elders aged on average 70.04 years (SD=6.34; range: 60-84). The internal consistency was verified by means of the Cronbach's alpha coefficient and the construct validity was analyzed by means of factorial exploratory analysis with varimax rotation. Full and shortened score means were analyzed comparing the perceived stress in terms of self-assessment of health, perceived socioeconomic condition, marital status, and living conditions, among others. RESULTS: As for reliability, the full version has showed similar internal consistency (r=0.82) compared to the shortened one (r=0.83). The factorial analysis found two factors for the full and one factor for the shortened scale. Question 12 showed the lowest factorial loads. When analyzing PSS likelihood of differentiating the perceived stress in terms of the study variables, it was found the full scale had greater differences in perceived stress than the shortened scale. CONCLUSIONS: The Perceived Stress Scale proved to be a clear and reliable tool to measure the perceived stress of Brazilian elderly, showing suitable psychometric performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available