Factor structure and psychometric properties of the Birth Satisfaction Scale–Revised in Portuguese postpartum women

OBJECTIVE This study aims to develop a Portuguese-language version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) for clinical and research use in Portugal (PT-BSS-R). The factor structure, its invariance across depression levels, and the internal consistency of the PT-BSS-R were analysed. METHOD A sample of 1373 Portuguese-speaking postpartum women completed a sociodemographic and clinical form, the PT-BSS-R, and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale through an online survey tool. Four competing models were tested through confirmatory factor analyses and bifactor model-based psychometric indices were calculated. The internal consistency and the divergent/convergent validity are analysed. RESULTS The psychometric properties of PT-BSS-R were found to be generally excellent. Both the original correlated three-factor model and the bifactor model exhibited a good fit to the data. Results from the bifactor model support the use of both the BSS-R total score and the subscale scores. Exemplary invariance findings were observed between groups stratified on the basis of depression screening. PT-BSS-R has demonstrated both divergent and convergent validity as well as internal consistency. CONCLUSION PT-BSS-R is a psychometrically robust measure of birth satisfaction appropriate for clinical and research use in Portugal.

[1]  Colin R. Martin,et al.  Translation of the UK-Birth-Satisfaction-Scale-Revised (BSS-R) into Brazilian (Portuguese) and description of initial measurement properties , 2021, The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians.

[2]  Lorie A. Kloda,et al.  Depression prevalence based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale compared to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM DIsorders classification: Systematic review and individual participant data meta‐analysis , 2020, International journal of methods in psychiatric research.

[3]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  Validation and factor structure of the Italian version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) , 2020, Journal of reproductive and infant psychology.

[4]  Colin R. Martin,et al.  Psychometric properties of the birth satisfaction scale-revised (BSS-R) in a sample of postpartum Iranian women , 2020, Health care for women international.

[5]  Tone Breines Simonsen,et al.  Are labor pain and birth experience associated with persistent pain and postpartum depression? A prospective cohort study , 2020, Scandinavian journal of pain.

[6]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  Validation of the Hebrew Birth Satisfaction Scale – Revised (BSS-R) and its relationship to perceived traumatic labour , 2019, Journal of reproductive and infant psychology.

[7]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  Spanish validation and factor structure of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). , 2019, Midwifery.

[8]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  The Birth Satisfaction Scale – Revised (BSS-R): should the subscale scores or the total score be used? , 2018, Journal of reproductive and infant psychology.

[9]  Colin R. Martin,et al.  Construct and content validity of the Turkish Birth Satisfaction Scale – Revised (T-BSS-R) , 2018, Journal of reproductive and infant psychology.

[10]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  Development and validation of the Australian version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) , 2018, Journal of reproductive and infant psychology.

[11]  Silvia Corchón,et al.  Validity of instruments for measuring the satisfaction of a woman and her partner with care received during labour and childbirth: Systematic review. , 2017, Midwifery.

[12]  Colin R. Martin,et al.  Measurement and structural invariance of the US version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) in a large sample. , 2017, Women and birth : journal of the Australian College of Midwives.

[13]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  Cross-cultural invariance of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R): comparing UK and US samples , 2017, Journal of reproductive and infant psychology.

[14]  Priya Ranganathan,et al.  Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: The use of correlation techniques , 2016, Perspectives in clinical research.

[15]  S. Reise,et al.  Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. , 2016, Psychological methods.

[16]  S. Reise,et al.  Applying Bifactor Statistical Indices in the Evaluation of Psychological Measures , 2016, Journal of personality assessment.

[17]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  Construct and content validity of the Greek version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale (G-BSS) , 2015 .

[18]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  Psychometric properties of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) for US mothers , 2015 .

[19]  Richard Scheines,et al.  When Are Multidimensional Data Unidimensional Enough for Structural Equation Modeling? An Evaluation of the DETECT Multidimensionality Index , 2015 .

[20]  Birk Diedenhofen,et al.  cocor: A Comprehensive Solution for the Statistical Comparison of Correlations , 2015, PloS one.

[21]  Caroline J. Hollins Martin,et al.  Development and psychometric properties of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). , 2014, Midwifery.

[22]  S. Reise,et al.  Scoring and Modeling Psychological Measures in the Presence of Multidimensionality , 2013, Journal of personality assessment.

[23]  Richard Scheines,et al.  Multidimensionality and Structural Coefficient Bias in Structural Equation Modeling , 2013 .

[24]  S. Reise.  The Rediscovery of Bifactor Measurement Models , 2012 .

[25]  C. Martin,et al.  The birth satisfaction scale. , 2011, International journal of health care quality assurance.

[26]  S. Reise,et al.  Bifactor Models and Rotations: Exploring the Extent to Which Multidimensional Data Yield Univocal Scale Scores , 2010, Journal of personality assessment.

[27]  Klaas Sijtsma,et al.  On the Use, the Misuse, and the Very Limited Usefulness of Cronbach’s Alpha , 2008, Psychometrika.

[28]  S. West,et al.  A Comparison of Bifactor and Second-Order Models of Quality of Life , 2006, Multivariate behavioral research.

[29]  William Revelle,et al.  Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and Mcdonald’s ωH: their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability , 2005 .

[30]  H. Barros,et al.  Comparative Incidence of Depression in Women and Men, During Pregnancy and after Childbirth , 1996, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[31]  D. Watson,et al.  Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development , 1995 .

[32]  P. Bentler,et al.  Comparative fit indexes in structural models. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  J. Cox,et al.  Detection of Postnatal Depression , 1987, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[34]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .