Reliability and validity evaluation of the chinese revision of the attitude towards adult vaccination scale.

Jie Kong, Chunguang Liang, Dongmei Fu, Liying Wang, Xiangru Yan, Sisi Li, Hui Zhang
Author Information
  1. Jie Kong: School of Nursing, Jinzhou Medical University, No 40, Section 3, Songpo Road, Jinzhou, 121001, China.
  2. Chunguang Liang: School of Nursing, Jinzhou Medical University, No 40, Section 3, Songpo Road, Jinzhou, 121001, China. liangchunguang@jzmu.edu.cn.
  3. Dongmei Fu: School of Nursing, Jinzhou Medical University, No 40, Section 3, Songpo Road, Jinzhou, 121001, China.
  4. Liying Wang: School of Nursing, Jinzhou Medical University, No 40, Section 3, Songpo Road, Jinzhou, 121001, China.
  5. Xiangru Yan: School of Nursing, Jinzhou Medical University, No 40, Section 3, Songpo Road, Jinzhou, 121001, China.
  6. Sisi Li: School of Medicine, Panjin Vocational and Technical College, Panjin, China.
  7. Hui Zhang: School of Medicine, Wuhan College of Arts and Science, Wuhan, China.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although vaccination is one of the critical interventions to address global health issues, inadequate vaccination rates has become an international challenge. Vaccine hesitancy is the key to affecting inadequate vaccination rates. According to the WHO SAGE working group's definition, vaccine hesitancy refers to delaying or refusing vaccination and has been ranked as one of the top 10 health threats. There has yet to be a scale that evaluates vaccination attitudes among Chinese adults. However, an attitude quantity, the adult vaccination attitude scale, has been developed to assess adult vaccination attitudes and reasons for vaccine hesitancy.
OBJECTIVE: The Adult Attitudes to Vaccination Scale (ATAVAC) was initially developed by Professor Zoi Tsimtsiou et al. This study aimed to analyze the structure of the Chinese version of the ATAVAC and explore the relationship between adult vaccination attitudes, e-health literacy, and medical distrust.
METHODS: After obtaining author permission for the initial scales, the study was translated using the Brislin back-translation method. 693 adults were enrolled to the study. To validate this hypothesis, participants finished the socio-demographic questionnaire, the Chinese version of the ATAVAC, the electronic Health Literacy Scale (e-HEALS) and the Medical Mistrust Index (MMI). The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to examine the underlying structure of the factors of the Chinese version of the Adult Vaccination Attitude Scale and to measure its reliability and validity.
RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the Chinese version of the ATAVAC was 0.885, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranging from 0.850 to 0.958 for each dimension. The content validity index was 0.90, and the retest reliability was 0.943. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) supported the 3-factor structure of the translation instrument, and the scale had good discriminant validity. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed a degree of freedom of 1.219, a model fit index (GFI) of 0.979, a normative fit index (NFI) of 0.991, a Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) of 0.998, a comparability index (CFI) of 0.998 and a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.026.
CONCLUSION: The results show that the Chinese version of the ATAVAC has demonstrated good reliability and validity. Hence, it can be used as an effective tool to assess vaccination attitudes among Chinese adults.

Keywords

References

  1. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2014;10(9):2543-50 [PMID: 25483472]
  2. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2016 Sep;12(9):2464-8 [PMID: 27159558]
  3. Vaccines (Basel). 2019 Dec 20;8(1): [PMID: 31861816]
  4. J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63 [PMID: 27330520]
  5. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2020 Aug 2;16(8):1923-1936 [PMID: 31995443]
  6. Vaccine. 2020 Nov 3;38(47):7464-7471 [PMID: 33041097]
  7. Nutrients. 2021 May 27;13(6): [PMID: 34071874]
  8. Vaccine. 2011 Sep 2;29(38):6598-605 [PMID: 21763384]
  9. Vaccine. 2019 Oct 31;37(46):6900-6906 [PMID: 31564452]
  10. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013 Aug;9(8):1763-73 [PMID: 23584253]
  11. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2020 May 3;16(5):1040-1049 [PMID: 31567057]
  12. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2023 Apr;32(4):489-496 [PMID: 36449400]
  13. Pediatric Health Med Ther. 2019 Dec 18;10:177-182 [PMID: 31908567]
  14. Health Soc Care Community. 2021 May;29(3):818-828 [PMID: 33595159]
  15. J Med Internet Res. 2006 Jun 16;8(2):e9 [PMID: 16867972]
  16. Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Aug 12;9(8): [PMID: 34442175]
  17. Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Sep 03;9(9): [PMID: 34579222]
  18. Vaccine. 2020 Oct 7;38(43):6751-6756 [PMID: 32891473]
  19. J Med Internet Res. 2011 Apr 20;13(2):e33 [PMID: 21752784]
  20. Health Serv Res. 2009 Dec;44(6):2093-105 [PMID: 19732170]
  21. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jul 09;15(7): [PMID: 29987255]
  22. Lancet. 2021 Mar 13;397(10278):1023-1034 [PMID: 33587887]
  23. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2020 Jul 2;16(7):1511-1520 [PMID: 31977285]
  24. Patient Educ Couns. 2021 Aug;104(8):1878-1886 [PMID: 33632632]
  25. Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2022 Nov 6;56(11):1560-1564 [PMID: 36372744]
  26. Vaccine. 2007 Jan 2;25(1):154-60 [PMID: 17064823]
  27. Rev Enferm. 2015 Oct;38(10):18-27 [PMID: 26685562]
  28. Vaccine. 2015 Aug 14;33(34):4165-75 [PMID: 25896384]
  29. Vaccine. 2019 Feb 21;37(9):1174-1181 [PMID: 30709724]
  30. Vaccine. 2016 Nov 11;34(47):5724-5735 [PMID: 27745951]
  31. Clin Ther. 2017 Aug;39(8):1550-1562 [PMID: 28774498]
  32. Vaccine. 2018 Feb 1;36(6):779-787 [PMID: 29325822]
  33. Vaccines (Basel). 2020 Oct 01;8(4): [PMID: 33019663]
  34. Front Public Health. 2022 Sep 20;10:971707 [PMID: 36203657]
  35. Lancet. 2020 Sep 19;396(10254):800-802 [PMID: 32910908]
  36. Eur J Health Econ. 2020 Sep;21(7):977-982 [PMID: 32591957]
  37. Vaccine. 2022 May 9;40(21):2933-2939 [PMID: 35410815]
  38. Res Nurs Health. 1991 Apr;14(2):165-8 [PMID: 2047538]
  39. Infect Drug Resist. 2011;4:197-207 [PMID: 22114512]
  40. Nurs Res. 1986 Nov-Dec;35(6):382-5 [PMID: 3640358]
  41. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2018 Jun;27(6):652-659 [PMID: 29582499]
  42. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2022 May 9;18:581-609 [PMID: 34780260]
  43. N Engl J Med. 2021 Jun 24;384(25):e100 [PMID: 33951377]
  44. J Med Internet Res. 2006 Nov 14;8(4):e27 [PMID: 17213046]
  45. Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Feb 25;9(3): [PMID: 33668923]

MeSH Term

Humans
Adult
Reproducibility of Results
Trust
Psychometrics
Attitude
Translating
Surveys and Questionnaires

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0vaccination0ChinesescaleattitudesATAVACversionvalidityindexadultsadultfactoranalysishesitancyattitudeAdultVaccinationScalestudystructurereliabilityonehealthinadequateratesvaccineamongdevelopedassessexploratoryEFAconfirmatoryCFAusedAttitudeCronbach'salphagoodfit998BACKGROUND:AlthoughcriticalinterventionsaddressglobalissuesbecomeinternationalchallengeVaccinekeyaffectingAccordingWHOSAGEworkinggroup'sdefinitionrefersdelayingrefusingrankedtop10threatsyetevaluatesHoweverquantityreasonsOBJECTIVE:AttitudesinitiallyProfessorZoiTsimtsiouetalaimedanalyzeexplorerelationshipe-healthliteracymedicaldistrustMETHODS:obtainingauthorpermissioninitialscalestranslatedusingBrislinback-translationmethod693enrolledvalidatehypothesisparticipantsfinishedsocio-demographicquestionnaireelectronicHealthLiteracye-HEALSMedicalMistrustIndexMMIexamineunderlyingfactorsmeasureRESULTS:coefficient885coefficientsranging850958dimensioncontent90retest943supported3-factortranslationinstrumentdiscriminantrevealeddegreefreedom1219modelGFI979normativeNFI991Tucker-LewisTLIcomparabilityCFIrootmeansquareerrorapproximationRMSEA026CONCLUSION:resultsshowdemonstratedHencecaneffectivetoolReliabilityevaluationchineserevisiontowardsPsychometricproperties

Similar Articles

Cited By