Turkish validity and reliability study of the Infection Prevention Behavior Scale of Individuals (IPBS-I) A Turkish Scale for Infection Prevention Behaviors
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Infection Prevention Behavior Scale of Individuals (IPBS-I) among Turkish individuals.
Materials and Methods: This was a methodological validity and reliability study. A total of 309 individuals between the ages of 18-65 who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled. The IPBS-I was translated into Turkish using the translation-back-translation technique. Data were collected via the Personal Information Form (PIF), Turkish version of the IPBS-I (IPBS-I-TR), and Protective Behaviors Towards COVID-19 Scale (PBCS). Two weeks later, IPBS-I-TR evaluation was repeated. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed for construct validity, and the PBCS was applied for criterion validity. Its reliability was evaluated using internal consistency, item analysis, and test-retest reliability. Statistical significance was set at p< 0.05.
Results: In total, 309 individuals (183 women and 126 men) were enrolled in the study. The mean IPBS-I-TR was 4.09±0.64. The CFA results revealed ᵡ2=167.12, SD=51, and p=0.0001. It was determined that x²/SD was 3.277 in the model and that the model was compatible. The Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (S-RMR)=0.051, Comparative Fit Index (CFI)=0.929, Goodness of Fit Index (GFI)=0.917, and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA)=0.086 were determined to be within the acceptable range. The CFA supported the three-factor structure of the scale. The correlation coefficient with the PBCS was 0.639, confirming the criterion validity of the scale. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the entire scale and three subscales (“Blocking the Pathogen,” “Blocking Transmission,” and “Improving Immunity”) were 0.832, 0.826, and 0.725, respectively. The test-retest reliability of the entire scale and the three subscales was excellent (>0.80).
Conclusion: The Turkish version of the IPBS-I was confirmed to have good reliability and validity for evaluating infection-prevention behaviors in Turkish society.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Accepted 2023-10-10
Published 2023-10-12
References
Arora T, Grey I. Health behaviour changes during COVID-19 and the potential consequences:a mini-review. J Health Psychol. 2020;25(9):1155-1163. doi:10.1177/1359105320937053 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105320937053
Lu P, Kong D, Shelley M. Risk Perception, Preventive Behavior, and Medical Care Avoidance among American Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Aging Health. 2021;33(7-8):577-584. doi:10.1177/08982643211002084 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08982643211002084
Majid U, Wasim A, Bakshi S, Truong J. Knowledge, (mis-)conceptions, risk perception, and behavior change during pandemics: A scoping review of 149 studies. Public Underst Sci. 2020;29(8):777-799. doi:10.1177/0963662520963365 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520963365
Takahashi S, Sato K, Kusaka Y, Hagihara A. Public preventive awareness and preventive behaviors during a major influenza epidemic in Fukui, Japan. J Infect Public Health. 2017;10(5):637-643. doi:10.1016/j.jiph.2017.04.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2017.04.002
Gunderson J, Mitchell D, Reid K, Jordan M. COVID-19 ınformation-seeking and prevention behaviors in Florida, April 2020. Prev Chronic Dis. 2021;18:E17. doi:10.5888/pcd18.200575 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd18.200575
Shimoda H, Nagata T, Ishimaru T, Hino A, Ando H, Muramatsu K, et al. Personal infection prevention behaviors and campaigns to encourage travel during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1037496. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1037496 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1037496
Resnicow K, Bacon E, Yang P, Hawley S, Van Horn ML, An L. Novel predictors of COVID-19 protective behaviors among US adults: cross-sectional survey. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(4):e23488. doi:10.2196/23488 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/23488
Nanthamongkolchai S, Taechaboonsermsak P, Tawatting K, Suksatan W. Health risk behaviors, COVID-19 preventive behaviors, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the working-age population of Bangkok, Thailand. Int J Environ. Res. Public Health. 2022;19(20):13394. doi:10.3390/ijerph192013394 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192013394
Upake C, Nanthamongkolchai S, Taechaboonsermsak P, Yodmai K, Suksatan W. Factors predicting the Coronavirus Disease 2019 preventive behaviors of older adults: a cross-sectional study in Bangkok, Thailand. Int J Environ. Res. Public Health. 2022;19(16):10361. doi:10.3390/ijerph191610361 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610361
Hagger MS, Hamilton K. Social cognition theories and behavior change in COVID-19: a conceptual review. Behav Res Ther. 2022;154:104095. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2022.104095 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2022.104095
Wiersinga WJ, Rhodes A, Cheng AC, Peacock SJ, Prescott HC. Pathophysiology, transmission, diagnosis, and treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): a review. JAMA. 2020;324(8):782-793. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.12839 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.12839
Heo ML, Jang YM. Development and validation of the Infection Prevention Behavior Scale of Individuals (IPBS-I) for the general population. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2021;14:2791-2802. doi:10.2147/JMDH.S334154 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S334154
Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson. 7th Edition. New York; 2014.
Riad A, Huang Y, Zheng L, Elavsky S. The associations of COVID-19 ınduced anxiety, related knowledge and protective behavior. Health Psychol Res. 2021;9(1):24768. doi:10.52965/001c.24768 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.24768
Yazici H, Altun F, Tosun C, Özdemir M, Karsantik Y. Psychometric evaluation of the Turkish version of the COVID-19 Induced Anxiety Scale and Protective Behaviors towards COVID-19 Scale. Psycho-Educational Research Reviews. 2021;10(3):478-489. doi: 10.52963/PERR_Biruni_V10.N3.30 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52963/PERR_Biruni_V10.N3.30
Lee EO, Lim N, Park H, Lee I, Kim J, Bae J. Nursing Study And Statistical Analysis. 1st ed. Paju: Sumoonsa; 2009
Sharma B. A focus on reliability in developmental research through Cronbach’s Alpha among medical, dental and paramedical professionals. Asian Pac J Health Sci. 2016;3(4):271-278. doi: 10.21276/apjhs.2016.3.4.43 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21276/apjhs.2016.3.4.43
Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research [published correction appears in J Chiropr Med. 2017 Dec;16(4):346]. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155-163. doi:10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
Taherdoost H. Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management (IJARM). 2016;5(3):28-36. hal-02546799 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205040