翻译并验证中国大陆护士同性恋平权实践量表。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Sexual Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-28 eCollection Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1093/sexmed/qfae073
Han Zhang, Lixia Chen, Wei Fei, Sihan Chen, J I Daihong
{"title":"翻译并验证中国大陆护士同性恋平权实践量表。","authors":"Han Zhang, Lixia Chen, Wei Fei, Sihan Chen, J I Daihong","doi":"10.1093/sexmed/qfae073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The gay affirmative practice (GAP) scale is an effective tool for evaluating the beliefs and behaviors of health care professionals toward gay and lesbian clients.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the GAP scale among Chinese nurses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate the Chinese version of the GAP (C-GAP) scale after translation and cross-cultural adaptation and to examine its psychometric characteristics. The reliability and validity of the C-GAP scale were determined by item analysis, factor analysis, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and discriminant construct validity.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>The GAP scale was translated and adapted specifically for China. A total of 1440 participants completed the C-GAP scale, sociodemographic questionnaire, and Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The C-GAP scale exhibited a Cronbach α of 0.95, with a high test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.92. Exploratory factor analysis identified 2 factors that accounted for 59.91% of the total variance. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis were as follows: χ<sup>2</sup>/<i>df</i> = 1.09, goodness-of-fit index = 0.98, adjusted goodness-of-fit index = 0.97, root mean square error of approximation = 0.01, Tucker-Lewis index = 1.00, comparative fit index = 1.00, incremental fit index = 1.00, parsimony goodness-of-fit index = 0.85, and parsimony normed fit index = 0.91. These findings confirm that all goodness-of-fit indices were satisfactory.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>The C-GAP scale can be an effective tool for health care professionals and managers and for education and research; it can also identify the beliefs and behaviors of health care professionals toward gay and lesbian clients, facilitating cultural competence development and enhancing care quality awareness and skills.</p><p><strong>Strengths and limitations: </strong>The C-GAP scale demonstrates reliability and validity; however, because the sample consisted only of nurses, the findings may not be generalizable to other professional groups, such as counselors and therapists. Therefore, the occupational focus of the sample limited the broader applicability of the results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The C-GAP scale is a reliable and valid tool suitable for assessing the practice attitudes and behaviors of Chinese nurses toward gay and lesbian clients.</p>","PeriodicalId":21782,"journal":{"name":"Sexual Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11514059/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Translating and validating the gay affirmative practice scale for nurses in mainland China.\",\"authors\":\"Han Zhang, Lixia Chen, Wei Fei, Sihan Chen, J I Daihong\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/sexmed/qfae073\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The gay affirmative practice (GAP) scale is an effective tool for evaluating the beliefs and behaviors of health care professionals toward gay and lesbian clients.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the GAP scale among Chinese nurses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate the Chinese version of the GAP (C-GAP) scale after translation and cross-cultural adaptation and to examine its psychometric characteristics. The reliability and validity of the C-GAP scale were determined by item analysis, factor analysis, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and discriminant construct validity.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>The GAP scale was translated and adapted specifically for China. A total of 1440 participants completed the C-GAP scale, sociodemographic questionnaire, and Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The C-GAP scale exhibited a Cronbach α of 0.95, with a high test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.92. Exploratory factor analysis identified 2 factors that accounted for 59.91% of the total variance. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis were as follows: χ<sup>2</sup>/<i>df</i> = 1.09, goodness-of-fit index = 0.98, adjusted goodness-of-fit index = 0.97, root mean square error of approximation = 0.01, Tucker-Lewis index = 1.00, comparative fit index = 1.00, incremental fit index = 1.00, parsimony goodness-of-fit index = 0.85, and parsimony normed fit index = 0.91. These findings confirm that all goodness-of-fit indices were satisfactory.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>The C-GAP scale can be an effective tool for health care professionals and managers and for education and research; it can also identify the beliefs and behaviors of health care professionals toward gay and lesbian clients, facilitating cultural competence development and enhancing care quality awareness and skills.</p><p><strong>Strengths and limitations: </strong>The C-GAP scale demonstrates reliability and validity; however, because the sample consisted only of nurses, the findings may not be generalizable to other professional groups, such as counselors and therapists. Therefore, the occupational focus of the sample limited the broader applicability of the results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The C-GAP scale is a reliable and valid tool suitable for assessing the practice attitudes and behaviors of Chinese nurses toward gay and lesbian clients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sexual Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11514059/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sexual Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/sexmed/qfae073\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexual Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sexmed/qfae073","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景男同性恋平权实践(GAP)量表是评估医护人员对男同性恋和女同性恋服务对象的信念和行为的有效工具。目的:本研究旨在考察中国护士使用 GAP 量表的信度和效度:方法:本研究对经过翻译和跨文化改编的中文版 GAP(C-GAP)量表进行了定量横断面研究,并考察了其心理测量学特征。通过项目分析、因子分析、内部一致性、重测信度和判别建构效度确定了 C-GAP 量表的信度和效度:GAP 量表专门针对中国进行了翻译和改编。共有 1440 名参与者完成了 C-GAP 量表、社会人口调查问卷和马洛-克劳恩社会理想度量表:C-GAP 量表的 Cronbach α 值为 0.95,测试-再测信度系数高达 0.92。探索性因子分析确定了 2 个因子,占总方差的 59.91%。确认性因子分析结果如下:χ2/df = 1.09,拟合优度指数 = 0.98,调整拟合优度指数 = 0.97,均方根近似误差 = 0.01,塔克-刘易斯指数 = 1.00,比较拟合指数 = 1.00,增量拟合指数 = 1.00,解析拟合优度指数 = 0.85,解析规范拟合指数 = 0.91。这些结果证实,所有拟合优度指数均令人满意:临床意义:C-GAP 量表可作为医护专业人员和管理人员以及教育和研究的有效工具;它还能确定医护专业人员对同性恋客户的信念和行为,促进文化能力的发展,提高护理质量意识和技能:C-GAP量表具有可靠性和有效性;但是,由于样本仅由护士组成,研究结果可能无法推广到其他专业群体,如心理咨询师和治疗师。因此,样本的职业重点限制了结果的广泛适用性:结论:C-GAP量表是一个可靠且有效的工具,适用于评估中国护士对同性恋服务对象的态度和行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Translating and validating the gay affirmative practice scale for nurses in mainland China.

Background: The gay affirmative practice (GAP) scale is an effective tool for evaluating the beliefs and behaviors of health care professionals toward gay and lesbian clients.

Aim: This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the GAP scale among Chinese nurses.

Methods: A quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate the Chinese version of the GAP (C-GAP) scale after translation and cross-cultural adaptation and to examine its psychometric characteristics. The reliability and validity of the C-GAP scale were determined by item analysis, factor analysis, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and discriminant construct validity.

Outcomes: The GAP scale was translated and adapted specifically for China. A total of 1440 participants completed the C-GAP scale, sociodemographic questionnaire, and Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale.

Results: The C-GAP scale exhibited a Cronbach α of 0.95, with a high test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.92. Exploratory factor analysis identified 2 factors that accounted for 59.91% of the total variance. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis were as follows: χ2/df = 1.09, goodness-of-fit index = 0.98, adjusted goodness-of-fit index = 0.97, root mean square error of approximation = 0.01, Tucker-Lewis index = 1.00, comparative fit index = 1.00, incremental fit index = 1.00, parsimony goodness-of-fit index = 0.85, and parsimony normed fit index = 0.91. These findings confirm that all goodness-of-fit indices were satisfactory.

Clinical implications: The C-GAP scale can be an effective tool for health care professionals and managers and for education and research; it can also identify the beliefs and behaviors of health care professionals toward gay and lesbian clients, facilitating cultural competence development and enhancing care quality awareness and skills.

Strengths and limitations: The C-GAP scale demonstrates reliability and validity; however, because the sample consisted only of nurses, the findings may not be generalizable to other professional groups, such as counselors and therapists. Therefore, the occupational focus of the sample limited the broader applicability of the results.

Conclusion: The C-GAP scale is a reliable and valid tool suitable for assessing the practice attitudes and behaviors of Chinese nurses toward gay and lesbian clients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sexual Medicine
Sexual Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
103
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: Sexual Medicine is an official publication of the International Society for Sexual Medicine, and serves the field as the peer-reviewed, open access journal for rapid dissemination of multidisciplinary clinical and basic research in all areas of global sexual medicine, and particularly acts as a venue for topics of regional or sub-specialty interest. The journal is focused on issues in clinical medicine and epidemiology but also publishes basic science papers with particular relevance to specific populations. Sexual Medicine offers clinicians and researchers a rapid route to publication and the opportunity to publish in a broadly distributed and highly visible global forum. The journal publishes high quality articles from all over the world and actively seeks submissions from countries with expanding sexual medicine communities. Sexual Medicine relies on the same expert panel of editors and reviewers as The Journal of Sexual Medicine and Sexual Medicine Reviews.
期刊最新文献
Translating and validating the gay affirmative practice scale for nurses in mainland China. A review of Peyronie's disease insurance coverage. Beyond conventional wisdom: unexplored risk factors for penile fracture. Clinical case of 45,X/46,XY mosaic male with ejaculatory disorder associated with seminal vesicle dysplasia: a case report. Female sexual dysfunctions in multiple sclerosis patients with lower urinary tract symptoms: an Italian case-control study.
×
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