Turkish Adaptation of Menopause Emotional Symptom Questionnaire: Validity and Reliability Analysis

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to conduct validity and reliability analyses of the Menopause Emotional Symptom Questionnaire (MESQ) and adapt the scale into the Turkish language. Methods: The study sample consisted of 234 perimenopausal women admitted to two state hospitals located in the Central Anatolia Region of Turkey. Data were collected using the Descriptive Information Form developed for this study, along with the Menopause Emotional Symptom Questionnaire (MESQ) and the Beck Anxiety Scale (BAS).The language, content and construct validity, internal consistency and parallel form reliability were analysed. Results: Exploratory factor analysis of the 13-item Turkish form of the MESQ confirmed that the scale had a two-dimensional structure. The factor loadings ranged from 0.414 to 0.921. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the model had a good fit (AGFI = 0.904 and χ²/sd = 1.714), with an acceptable fit level (CFI = 0.974, GFI = 0.935, and RMSEA = 0.055). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the total scale score was 0.888, which showed that the scale had strong reliability. In addition, a highly significant correlation was found between the BLS and MESQ total scores (r = 0.608, p < 0.001). Conclusion: It was determined that the Turkish form of the MESQ showed high validity and reliability.

Keywords

• Menopause
• reliability
• validity

Turkish Adaptation of Menopause Emotional Symptom Questionnaire: Validity and Reliability Analysis

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to conduct validity and reliability analyses of the Menopause Emotional Symptom Questionnaire (MESQ) and adapt the scale into the Turkish language.

Methods: The study sample consisted of 234 perimenopausal women admitted to two state hospitals located in the Central Anatolia Region of Turkey. Data were collected using the Descriptive Information Form developed for this study, along with the Menopause Emotional Symptom Questionnaire (MESQ) and the Beck Anxiety Scale (BAS).The language, content and construct validity, internal consistency and convergent validity were analysed.

Results:  Exploratory factor analysis of the 13-item Turkish form of the MESQ confirmed that the scale had a two-dimensional structure. The factor loadings ranged from 0.414 to 0.921. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the model had a good fit (AGFI=0.904 and χ²/sd=1.714), with an acceptable fit level (CFI=0.974, GFI=0.935, and RMSEA=0.055). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the total scale score was 0.888, which showed that the scale had strong reliability. In addition, a moderate and statistically significant correlation was found between the BAS and MESQ total scores (r=0.574, p<.001).

Conclusion: It was determined that the Turkish form of the MESQ showed high validity and reliability.

Keywords

• Menopause
• reliability
• validity

References

1. Abay, H., Altun, E., & Kaplan, S. (2024). Development of the Menopause Perception Scale. Menopause (New York, N.Y.), 31(9), 818–827. https://doi.org/10.1097/GME.0000000000002398.
2. Alblooshi, S., Taylor, M., & Gill, N. (2023). Does menopause elevate the risk for developing depression and anxiety? Results from a systematic review. Australasian psychiatry: bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists, 31(2), 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562231165439.
3. Arar, M. A., & Erbil, N. (2022). Türkiye'de menopozal dönemdeki kadınların yaşam kalitesini inceleyen çalışmalar: Bir sistematik derleme. Androloji Bülteni, 24(1),38−51.https://doi.org/10.24898/tandro.2022.69783.
4. Badawy, Y., Spector, A., Li, Z., & Desai, R. (2024). The risk of depression in the menopausal stages: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 357, 126–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2024.04.041.
5. Beck, A. T., Epstein, N., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1988). An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric properties. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 893.https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006x.56.6.893.
6. Bekiroğlu, N., Gürbüz, A., Konyalıoğlu, R., Ayas, S., Alkan, A., & Eren, S. (2008). Menopoz Semptomlarını Değerlendirme Ölçeği (MSDÖ), Kupperman Menopoz Ölçeği (KMÖ) ve Nothingam Sağlık Profili (NSP) ölçeklerinin güvenirlik ve yanıtlama etki büyüklüklerinin yeni menopozlu hastalarda karşılaştırılması. Zeynep Kamil Tıp Bülteni, 39(1), 11–15.
7. Berberoğlu, E. O., & Uygun, S. (2012). Çevre farkındalığı-çevre tutumu arasındaki ilişkinin yapısal eşitlik modeli ile sınanması. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(2), 459–473.
8. Cruchinho, P., López-Franco, M. D., Capelas, M. L., Almeida, S., Bennett, P. M., Miranda da Silva, M., Teixeira, G., Nunes, E., Lucas, P., Gaspar, F., & Handovers4SafeCare (2024). Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of Measurement Instruments: A Practical Guideline for Novice Researchers. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 17, 2701–2728. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S419714.

9. Çapık, C. (2014). Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmalarında doğrulayıcı faktör analizinin kullanımı. Anadolu Hemşirelik ve Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 17(3), 196–205.
10. Çapık, C., Gözüm, S., & Aksayan, S. (2018). Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlama aşamaları, dil ve kültür uyarlaması: Güncellenmiş rehber. FNJN Florence Nightingale Journal of Nursing, 26(3), 199-210. https://doi.org/10.26650/FNJN397481.
11. Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4
12. Davis, S. R., Pinkerton, J., Santoro, N., & Simoncini, T. (2023). Menopause-Biology, consequences, supportive care, and therapeutic options. Cell, 186(19), 4038–4058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2023.08.016.
13. Esin, M. N. (2015). Veri toplama yöntem ve araçları & veri toplama araçlarının güvenirlik ve geçerliği. In S.
14. Erdoğan, N. Nahcivan & M. N. Esin (Eds.), Hemşirelikte Araştırma (2nd ed., pp. 193–234). Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri.
15. Gatenby, C., & Simpson, P. (2024). Menopause: Physiology, definitions, and symptoms. Best Practice & Research. Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 38(1), 101855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2023.101855.
16. Harlow, S. D., & Paramsothy, P. (2011). Menstruation and the menopausal transition. Obstetrics and gynecology clinics of North America, 38(3), 595–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogc.2011.05.010.
17. Kim, N. Y., Yoo, S. K., Jin, J. C., Han, S., Hong, J. S., & Kim, S. M. (2023). Development and verification of the Menopause Emotional Symptom Questionnaire. Menopause (New York, N.Y.), 30(9), 961–968. https://doi.org/10.1097/GME.0000000000002224.
18. Kleinman, N. L., Rohrbacker, N. J., Bushmakin, A. G., Whiteley, J., Lynch, W. D., & Shah, S. N. (2013). Direct and indirect costs of women diagnosed with menopause symptoms. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 55(4), 465–470. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182820515.
19. Kline, B. R. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
20. Mohajan, H. K. (2018). Two criteria for good measurements in research: Validity and reliability. Annals of Spiru Haret University. Economic Series, 17(4), 59–82. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3152355
21. Nik Hazlina, N. H., Norhayati, M. N., Shaiful Bahari, I., & Nik Muhammad Arif, N. A. (2022). Prevalence of Psychosomatic and Genitourinary Syndrome Among Menopausal Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Medicine, 9, 848202. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.848202.
22. Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4), 459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199. Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Experimental designs using ANOVA. Thomson/Brooks/Cole, Belmont.
23. Ulusoy, M., Sahin, N. H., & Erkmen, H. (1998). Turkish version of the Beck Anxiety Inventory: psychometric properties. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 12(2), 163.
24. Valiensi, S. M., Belardo, M. A., Pilnik, S., Izbizky, G., Starvaggi, A. P., & Castelo Branco, C. (2019). Sleep quality and related factors in postmenopausal women. Maturitas, 123, 73–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2019.02.008.
25. Waltz, C. W., & Bausell, R. B. (1981). Nursing Research: Design, Statistics and Computer Analysis. Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis.
26. Whiteley, J., DiBonaventura, M.d, Wagner, J. S., Alvir, J., & Shah, S. (2013). The impact of menopausal symptoms on quality of life, productivity, and economic outcomes. Journal of Women's Health (2002), 22(11), 983–990. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2012.3719
27. Wood, K., McCarthy, S., Pitt, H., Randle, M., & Thomas, S. L. (2025). Women's experiences and expectations during the menopause transition: a systematic qualitative narrative review. Health Promotion International, 40(1), daaf005. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daaf005.
28. Worsley, R., Bell, R., Kulkarni, J., & Davis, S. R. (2014). The association between vasomotor symptoms and depression during perimenopause: a systematic review. Maturitas, 77(2), 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2013.11.007.
29. Yaşar, M. (2014). İstatistiğe Yönelik Tutum Ölçeği: Geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması. PAU Journal of Education, 36(36), 59–75.
30. Zeng, W., Xu, J., Yang, Y., Lv, M., & Chu, X. (2025). Factors influencing sleep disorders in perimenopausal women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Neurology, 16, 1460613. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2025.1460613.