Adaptation and Psychometric Assessment of the Turkish Version of the Perceived Access to Health Care Questionnaire: Validity and Reliability Analysis.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Healthcare Pub Date : 2025-02-10 DOI:10.3390/healthcare13040370
Salim Yilmaz, Metin Ateş, Perihan Abay
{"title":"Adaptation and Psychometric Assessment of the Turkish Version of the Perceived Access to Health Care Questionnaire: Validity and Reliability Analysis.","authors":"Salim Yilmaz, Metin Ateş, Perihan Abay","doi":"10.3390/healthcare13040370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Access to health services is a fundamental element of social welfare and individual quality of life. This study aimed to fill gaps in the Turkish literature regarding the assessment and perception of access to health services and to introduce a valid and reliable measurement tool for this purpose. <b>Methods:</b> This methodological cross-sectional study was conducted in Istanbul with 639 adults aged 18-65 years. Linguistic and cultural appropriateness were evaluated, and validation was assessed through known group validity using sociodemographic factors. Convergent and divergent validity analyses were performed. Reliability was examined using alpha coefficients and 27% percentile discrimination. A secondary confirmatory factor analysis provided the overall score for the scale. <b>Results:</b> The scale was validated on four factors, and seven items were removed during refinement, resulting in a final twenty-three-item scale. Internal consistency was robust, with alpha coefficients of 0.899 for acceptability and affordability, 0.825 for availability, 0.773 for accommodation, 0.892 for awareness, and 0.943 for overall access. Perceived access to health services was significantly correlated with age, beliefs in easy access to health, and satisfaction with outpatient care. <b>Conclusions:</b> The validated scale provides a reliable tool for measuring perceptions of access to health services, which is essential for shaping health policies and practices. Comprehensive assessments using such tools can help discern nuanced distinctions between perceived and actual access.</p>","PeriodicalId":12977,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare","volume":"13 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11855100/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13040370","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Access to health services is a fundamental element of social welfare and individual quality of life. This study aimed to fill gaps in the Turkish literature regarding the assessment and perception of access to health services and to introduce a valid and reliable measurement tool for this purpose. Methods: This methodological cross-sectional study was conducted in Istanbul with 639 adults aged 18-65 years. Linguistic and cultural appropriateness were evaluated, and validation was assessed through known group validity using sociodemographic factors. Convergent and divergent validity analyses were performed. Reliability was examined using alpha coefficients and 27% percentile discrimination. A secondary confirmatory factor analysis provided the overall score for the scale. Results: The scale was validated on four factors, and seven items were removed during refinement, resulting in a final twenty-three-item scale. Internal consistency was robust, with alpha coefficients of 0.899 for acceptability and affordability, 0.825 for availability, 0.773 for accommodation, 0.892 for awareness, and 0.943 for overall access. Perceived access to health services was significantly correlated with age, beliefs in easy access to health, and satisfaction with outpatient care. Conclusions: The validated scale provides a reliable tool for measuring perceptions of access to health services, which is essential for shaping health policies and practices. Comprehensive assessments using such tools can help discern nuanced distinctions between perceived and actual access.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare
Healthcare Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal (free for readers), which publishes original theoretical and empirical work in the interdisciplinary area of all aspects of medicine and health care research. Healthcare publishes Original Research Articles, Reviews, Case Reports, Research Notes and Short Communications. We encourage researchers to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. For theoretical papers, full details of proofs must be provided so that the results can be checked; for experimental papers, full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Additionally, electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculations, experimental procedure, etc., can be deposited along with the publication as “Supplementary Material”.
期刊最新文献
Sociodemographic Determinants of Reproductive Healthcare Service Use Among Pregnant Women in Pakistan. An Evaluation of Health Behavior Change Training for Health and Care Professionals in St. Helena. Imagine the Possibilities Pain Coalition and Opioid Marketing to Veterans: Lessons for Military and Veterans Healthcare. A Screening Measure of Emotion Regulation Difficulties: Polish Norms and Psychometrics of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale-8 (DERS-8). Effects of Physical Exercise on Cardiometabolic Health in Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1