Research Article
PDF Mendeley EndNote BibTex Cite

Üreme Baskısı Ölçeğinin Türkçe Geçerlilik Güvenirliği

Year 2021, Volume 15, Issue 1, 100 - 109, 09.03.2021
https://doi.org/10.21763/tjfmpc.810973

Abstract

Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı, Üreme Baskısı Ölçeği’ni (ÜBÖ) Türkçeye uyarlayarak geçerlik ve güvenirliğini belirlemektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Araştırma, bir devlet hastanesinde 01 Temmuz-Ekim 2020 tarihleri arasında Kadın Hastalıkları Polikliniğine başvuran, araştırma kriterlerine uyan 150 sağlıklı kadın ile metodolojik olarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Ölçeğin geçerliliğinde; uzman görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi Kendall W testi ve yapı geçerliliğinin değerlendirilmesinde faktör analizi testleri (KMO, Bartlett Testi, Temel Bileşenler Analizi, Varimax Döndürme Yöntemi) uygulanmıştır. Ölçeğin güvenirliğinde; Cronbach Alpha, pearson korelasyon, bağımsız grup t-testi ve iki yarı (Split half) değerleri kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Üreme Baskısı Ölçeği’nin dil eşdeğerliliği sağlandıktan sonra, ölçekteki beş maddenin kapsam geçerliliği için 10 uzmanın görüşü alınmıştır (p=0.153). Üreme Baskısı Ölçeği’nin madde analizinde ölçeğin tüm maddelerinin toplam korelasyon değeri 0.25’in üzerinde bulunmuştur. Bu bulgu sonucunda ölçekten madde çıkarılmamıştır. Katılımcıların ölçekten aldıkları puan ortalamaları 0.872+1.24’tür. Ölçeğin iç tutarlılık güvenirlik katsayısı 0.72 olarak saptanmış ve ölçeğin iç tutarlılığının güvenilir olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ölçeğin zamana karşı değişmezlik ve iki yarı güvenirliğine yönelik analiz sonuçları da güvenirliği desteklemektedir. Sonuç: Üreme Baskısı Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonu kadınlarda geçerli ve güvenilir olarak kullanılabilir.

References

  • 1. Singh S, Maddow-Zimet I. Facility-based treatment for medical complications resulting from unsafe pregnancy termination in the developing world, 2012: a review of evidence from 26 countries. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol. Ağustos 2016;123(9):1489–98.
  • 2. Darroch JE, Singh S. Trends in contraceptive need and use in developing countries in 2003, 2008, and 2012: an analysis of national surveys. Lancet. Mayıs 2013;381(9879):1756–62.
  • 3. Upadhyay UD, Dworkin SL, Weitz TA, Foster DG. Development and validation of a reproductive autonomy scale. Stud Fam Plann. 2014;45(1):19–41.
  • 4. TNSA. Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması Ankara: Hacettepe Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü Yayınları. 2018. 53 s.
  • 5. TNSA. Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması Ankara: Hacettepe Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü Yayınları. 2013. 75-95s.
  • 6. Chamberlain L, Levenson R, Lee NC, Langhorne A, Kelley M, Miller E, vd. Addressing Intimate Partner Violence, Reproductive and Sexual Coercion: A Guide for Obstetric, Gynecologic and Reproductive Health Care Settings. https://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/userfiles/file/HealthCare/reproguidelines_low_res_FINAL.pdf Erişim Tarihi: 17.09.2020,2012
  • 7. Fay K, Yee L. Reproductive Coercion and Women’s Health. J Midwifery Womens Health. 01 Eylül 2018;63(5):518–25.
  • 8. Brandi K, Woodhams E, White KO, Mehta PK. An exploration of perceived contraceptive coercion at the time of abortion. Contraception. 01 Nisan 2018;97(4):329–34. 9. Grace KT, Anderson JC. Reproductive Coercion: A Systematic Review. C. 19, Trauma, Violence, and Abuse. SAGE Publications Ltd; 2018. s. 371–90.
  • 10. Kirk J, Marc L, Miller. Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. London: A Sage University Paper; 2014. 324-336 s.
  • 11. Thaller J, Messing JT. Reproductive Coercion by an Intimate Partner: Occurrence, Associations, and Interference with Sexual Health Decision Making. Heal Soc Work. 24 Şubat 2014;41(1):e11–9.
  • 12. Miller E, Decker MR, McCauley HL, Tancredi DJ, Levenson RR, Waldman J, vd. Pregnancy coercion, intimate partner violence and unintended pregnancy. Contraception. Nisan 2010;81(4):316–22.
  • 13. Clark J, Edward Haskins, Haskins C. Reproductive systems in the myxomycetes: a review. Mycosphere. 2010;1(4):337–53.
  • 14. Hill AL, Jones KA, McCauley HL, Tancredi DJ, Silverman JG, Miller E. Reproductive Coercion and Relationship Abuse Among Adolescents and Young Women Seeking Care at School Health Centers. Obstet Gynecol. 01 Ağustos 2019;134(2):351–9.
  • 15. Silverman JG, Boyce SC, Dehingia N, Rao N, Chandurkar D, Nanda P, vd. Reproductive coercion in Uttar Pradesh, India: Prevalence and associations with partner violence and reproductive health. SSM - Popul Heal. 01 Aralık 2019;9:100484.
  • 16. WHO. WHO | Strengthening health systems to respond to women subjected to intimate partner violence or sexual violence: [Internet]. WHO. World Health Organization; 2017 [kaynak 18 Eylül 2020]. Available at: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/violence/vaw-health-systems-manual/en/
  • 17. Büyüköztürk S. Manual of data analysis for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem Academy;2011. 174-180 s.
  • 18. McCauley HL, Silverman JG, Jones KA, Tancredi DJ, Decker MR, McCormick MC, vd. Psychometric properties and refinement of the Reproductive Coercion Scale. Contraception. 01 Mart 2017;95(3):292–8.
  • 19. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(12):1417–32.
  • 20. Tsang S, Royse CF, Terkawi AS. Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. C. 11, Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia. Medknow Publications; 2017. 80–9 s.
  • 21. Tavşancıl E. Measurement of attitudes and data analysis with SPSS.5. Baskı. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık; 2014. 244-249 s.
  • 22. Çapık C, Gözüm S, Aksayan S. Kültürlerarası Ölçek Uyarlama Aşamaları, Dil ve Kültür Uyarlaması: Güncellenmiş Rehberama Aşamaları, Dil ve Kültür Uyarlaması: Güncellenmiş Rehber Intercultural Scale Adaptation Stages, Language and Culture Adaptation: Updated Guideline. Florence Nightingale J Nurs. 2018;26(3):199–210.
  • 23. Ercan İ, Kan İ. Ölçeklerde Güvenirlik ve Geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2004;30 (3)211-16.
  • 24. Sümbüloğlu V, Sümbüloğlu K. Sağlık bilimlerinde araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Hatipoğlu Yayınları; 2000. 178-180 s.
  • 25. Aksayan S, Gözüm S. Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlaması için rehber I: Ölçek uyarlama aşamaları ve dil uyarlaması. Hemşirelik Araştırma Derg. 2002;4(1):9–14.
  • 26. Şencan H. Reliability and validity in social and behavioural measurements. Ankara, Turkey: Seçkin; 2005. 255-274 s.
  • 27. Alpay R. Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemlere giriş.Detay yayıncılık. 2003. 375-393 s.
  • 28. Karasar N. Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık; 2008. 67-79 s.
  • 29. Özdamar K. Statistical data analysis with packet programs (7th ed.). Eskisehir, Turkey: Kaan Bookstore; 2009. 274-275 s. 30. Timothy A, Brown. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research . Guilford; 2015. 380-396 s.
  • 31. Akgül A. Statistical analysis SPSS practices techniques in medical research (3rd ed.). Ankara, Turkey: EmekOfset; 2005. 384 s.
  • 32. Çimen S, Bahar Z, Öztürk C, Bektaş M. AIDS tutum ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Zo Sağlık Yüksekokulu Sağlık Eğitim Araştırma Derg. 2005;1(1):1–11.
  • 33. Sutherland M, Fantasia HC, Fontenot HB. Reproductive Coercion and Partner Violence Among College Women. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 01 Haziran 2015;44(s1):S56.

Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale

Year 2021, Volume 15, Issue 1, 100 - 109, 09.03.2021
https://doi.org/10.21763/tjfmpc.810973

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale by adapting it to Turkish. Material and Methods: The present research was methodologically planned to determine the validity and reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale which was adapted to Turkish. The study was carried out with 150 healthy women who met the research criteria and applied to the Gynecology Polyclinic between 01 July and October 2020 in a state hospital. In the validity of the scale; Factor analysis tests (KMO, Bartlett Test, Principal Component Analysis, Varimax Rotation Method) were used to evaluate the expert opinions.In the reliability of the scale; Cronbach Alpha, pearson correlation, independent group t-test and split half values were used. Results: After ensuring the language equivalence of the Reproductive Coercion Scale, it was determined that the experts agreed on the content of the items as a result of the opinions of 10 experts (p = 0.153) for the content validity of the five items in the scale. In the item analysis of the Reproductive Coercion Scale, the total correlation value of all items of the scale was found above 0.25. As a result of this finding, no item was removed from the scale. The average score of the participants from the scale is 0.872 + 1.24. The internal consistency reliability coefficient of the scale was found to be 0.72 and the internal consistency of the scale was found to be quite reliable. The results of the analysis of the scale's invariance against time and split half reliability also support the reliability. Conclusion: The Turkish version of the Reproductive Coercion Scale can be used validity and reliability in women.

References

  • 1. Singh S, Maddow-Zimet I. Facility-based treatment for medical complications resulting from unsafe pregnancy termination in the developing world, 2012: a review of evidence from 26 countries. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol. Ağustos 2016;123(9):1489–98.
  • 2. Darroch JE, Singh S. Trends in contraceptive need and use in developing countries in 2003, 2008, and 2012: an analysis of national surveys. Lancet. Mayıs 2013;381(9879):1756–62.
  • 3. Upadhyay UD, Dworkin SL, Weitz TA, Foster DG. Development and validation of a reproductive autonomy scale. Stud Fam Plann. 2014;45(1):19–41.
  • 4. TNSA. Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması Ankara: Hacettepe Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü Yayınları. 2018. 53 s.
  • 5. TNSA. Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması Ankara: Hacettepe Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü Yayınları. 2013. 75-95s.
  • 6. Chamberlain L, Levenson R, Lee NC, Langhorne A, Kelley M, Miller E, vd. Addressing Intimate Partner Violence, Reproductive and Sexual Coercion: A Guide for Obstetric, Gynecologic and Reproductive Health Care Settings. https://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/userfiles/file/HealthCare/reproguidelines_low_res_FINAL.pdf Erişim Tarihi: 17.09.2020,2012
  • 7. Fay K, Yee L. Reproductive Coercion and Women’s Health. J Midwifery Womens Health. 01 Eylül 2018;63(5):518–25.
  • 8. Brandi K, Woodhams E, White KO, Mehta PK. An exploration of perceived contraceptive coercion at the time of abortion. Contraception. 01 Nisan 2018;97(4):329–34. 9. Grace KT, Anderson JC. Reproductive Coercion: A Systematic Review. C. 19, Trauma, Violence, and Abuse. SAGE Publications Ltd; 2018. s. 371–90.
  • 10. Kirk J, Marc L, Miller. Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. London: A Sage University Paper; 2014. 324-336 s.
  • 11. Thaller J, Messing JT. Reproductive Coercion by an Intimate Partner: Occurrence, Associations, and Interference with Sexual Health Decision Making. Heal Soc Work. 24 Şubat 2014;41(1):e11–9.
  • 12. Miller E, Decker MR, McCauley HL, Tancredi DJ, Levenson RR, Waldman J, vd. Pregnancy coercion, intimate partner violence and unintended pregnancy. Contraception. Nisan 2010;81(4):316–22.
  • 13. Clark J, Edward Haskins, Haskins C. Reproductive systems in the myxomycetes: a review. Mycosphere. 2010;1(4):337–53.
  • 14. Hill AL, Jones KA, McCauley HL, Tancredi DJ, Silverman JG, Miller E. Reproductive Coercion and Relationship Abuse Among Adolescents and Young Women Seeking Care at School Health Centers. Obstet Gynecol. 01 Ağustos 2019;134(2):351–9.
  • 15. Silverman JG, Boyce SC, Dehingia N, Rao N, Chandurkar D, Nanda P, vd. Reproductive coercion in Uttar Pradesh, India: Prevalence and associations with partner violence and reproductive health. SSM - Popul Heal. 01 Aralık 2019;9:100484.
  • 16. WHO. WHO | Strengthening health systems to respond to women subjected to intimate partner violence or sexual violence: [Internet]. WHO. World Health Organization; 2017 [kaynak 18 Eylül 2020]. Available at: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/violence/vaw-health-systems-manual/en/
  • 17. Büyüköztürk S. Manual of data analysis for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem Academy;2011. 174-180 s.
  • 18. McCauley HL, Silverman JG, Jones KA, Tancredi DJ, Decker MR, McCormick MC, vd. Psychometric properties and refinement of the Reproductive Coercion Scale. Contraception. 01 Mart 2017;95(3):292–8.
  • 19. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(12):1417–32.
  • 20. Tsang S, Royse CF, Terkawi AS. Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. C. 11, Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia. Medknow Publications; 2017. 80–9 s.
  • 21. Tavşancıl E. Measurement of attitudes and data analysis with SPSS.5. Baskı. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık; 2014. 244-249 s.
  • 22. Çapık C, Gözüm S, Aksayan S. Kültürlerarası Ölçek Uyarlama Aşamaları, Dil ve Kültür Uyarlaması: Güncellenmiş Rehberama Aşamaları, Dil ve Kültür Uyarlaması: Güncellenmiş Rehber Intercultural Scale Adaptation Stages, Language and Culture Adaptation: Updated Guideline. Florence Nightingale J Nurs. 2018;26(3):199–210.
  • 23. Ercan İ, Kan İ. Ölçeklerde Güvenirlik ve Geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2004;30 (3)211-16.
  • 24. Sümbüloğlu V, Sümbüloğlu K. Sağlık bilimlerinde araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Hatipoğlu Yayınları; 2000. 178-180 s.
  • 25. Aksayan S, Gözüm S. Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlaması için rehber I: Ölçek uyarlama aşamaları ve dil uyarlaması. Hemşirelik Araştırma Derg. 2002;4(1):9–14.
  • 26. Şencan H. Reliability and validity in social and behavioural measurements. Ankara, Turkey: Seçkin; 2005. 255-274 s.
  • 27. Alpay R. Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemlere giriş.Detay yayıncılık. 2003. 375-393 s.
  • 28. Karasar N. Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık; 2008. 67-79 s.
  • 29. Özdamar K. Statistical data analysis with packet programs (7th ed.). Eskisehir, Turkey: Kaan Bookstore; 2009. 274-275 s. 30. Timothy A, Brown. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research . Guilford; 2015. 380-396 s.
  • 31. Akgül A. Statistical analysis SPSS practices techniques in medical research (3rd ed.). Ankara, Turkey: EmekOfset; 2005. 384 s.
  • 32. Çimen S, Bahar Z, Öztürk C, Bektaş M. AIDS tutum ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Zo Sağlık Yüksekokulu Sağlık Eğitim Araştırma Derg. 2005;1(1):1–11.
  • 33. Sutherland M, Fantasia HC, Fontenot HB. Reproductive Coercion and Partner Violence Among College Women. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 01 Haziran 2015;44(s1):S56.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Health Care Sciences and Services
Journal Section Orijinal Articles
Authors

Ruşen ÖZTÜRK
EGE ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0002-7838-2876
Türkiye


Özlem GÜNER (Primary Author)
SİNOP ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0002-8302-9073
Türkiye

Supporting Institution Yoktur.
Project Number -
Thanks -
Publication Date March 9, 2021
Application Date October 15, 2020
Acceptance Date December 16, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2021, Volume 15, Issue 1

Cite

Bibtex @research article { tjfmpc810973, journal = {Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care}, eissn = {1307-2048}, address = {}, publisher = {Aile Hekimliği Akademisi Derneği}, year = {2021}, volume = {15}, number = {1}, pages = {100 - 109}, doi = {10.21763/tjfmpc.810973}, title = {Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale}, key = {cite}, author = {Öztürk, Ruşen and Güner, Özlem} }
APA Öztürk, R. & Güner, Ö. (2021). Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale . Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care , 15 (1) , 100-109 . DOI: 10.21763/tjfmpc.810973
MLA Öztürk, R. , Güner, Ö. "Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale" . Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care 15 (2021 ): 100-109 <https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tjfmpc/issue/60645/810973>
Chicago Öztürk, R. , Güner, Ö. "Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale". Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care 15 (2021 ): 100-109
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale AU - Ruşen Öztürk , Özlem Güner Y1 - 2021 PY - 2021 N1 - doi: 10.21763/tjfmpc.810973 DO - 10.21763/tjfmpc.810973 T2 - Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 100 EP - 109 VL - 15 IS - 1 SN - -1307-2048 M3 - doi: 10.21763/tjfmpc.810973 UR - https://doi.org/10.21763/tjfmpc.810973 Y2 - 2020 ER -
EndNote %0 Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale %A Ruşen Öztürk , Özlem Güner %T Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale %D 2021 %J Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care %P -1307-2048 %V 15 %N 1 %R doi: 10.21763/tjfmpc.810973 %U 10.21763/tjfmpc.810973
ISNAD Öztürk, Ruşen , Güner, Özlem . "Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale". Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care 15 / 1 (March 2021): 100-109 . https://doi.org/10.21763/tjfmpc.810973
AMA Öztürk R. , Güner Ö. Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale. TJFMPC. 2021; 15(1): 100-109.
Vancouver Öztürk R. , Güner Ö. Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale. Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 2021; 15(1): 100-109.
IEEE R. Öztürk and Ö. Güner , "Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Reproductive Coercion Scale", Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 100-109, Mar. 2021, doi:10.21763/tjfmpc.810973

English or Turkish manuscripts from authors with new knowledge to contribute to understanding and improving health and primary care are welcome.