4.6 Article

Adaptation and validation of the quality of contraceptive counseling (QCC) scale for use in Ethiopia and India

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283925

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The researchers adapted the Quality of Contraceptive Counseling (QCC) scale from Mexico for Ethiopia and India, modifying items based on prior research and conducting cognitive interviews. They tested the adapted scales through client exit surveys and found that they were valid and reliable. The QCC scales and subscales fill a gap in measurement tools for ensuring high quality of care and fulfillment of human rights in contraceptive services.
We adapted the Quality of Contraceptive Counseling (QCC) scale, originally constructed in Mexico, for Ethiopia and India to expand its utility for measurement of client experiences with counseling. Scale items were modified based on prior research on women's preferences for counseling in each country, and refined through cognitive interviews (n = 20 per country). We tested the items through client exit surveys in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (n = 599), and Vadodara, India (n = 313). Psychometric analyses revealed the adapted scales were valid and reliable for use, and the final scales retained content validity according to the original published QCC construct definition. Specifically, confirmatory factor analysis revealed high factor loadings for almost all items on the original dimensions: Information Exchange, Interpersonal Relationship, Disrespect and Abuse. Internal consistency reliability was high in both settings (Alpha = 0.92 for QCC-Ethiopia and 0.74 for QCC-India). Final item pools contained 26 items in the QCC-Ethiopia Scale and 23 in the QCC-India Scale. Correlation analyses established convergent validity. QCC Scales and subscales fill a gap in measurement tools for ensuring high quality of care and fulfillment of human rights in contraceptive services, and consistent findings across continents suggest versatility in use across different contexts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据