Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Validation of the Chinese version of the Fear of Birth Scale among pregnant women.

Midwifery 2024 April 2
AIM: Adapt Fear of Birth Scale (FOBS) for the Chinese context, evaluate psychometric properties and determine optimal cutoff point for pregnant women in 3rd trimester.

DESIGN: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study. Cultural guidelines informed the development of the Chinese version of FOBS (FOBS-C) incorporating validation on translation, equivalence index, content validity index, and cognitive debriefing. Thirty pregnant women took a test-retest survey and another 1019 took three cross-sectional surveys. Convergent validation of the FOBS-C involved comparison with Childbirth Attitudes Questionnaire (CAQ), Wijma Delivery Expectancy Questionnaire (WDEQ-A), Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), and physiological indicators. Cutoff points for FOBS-C were identified using receiver operating characteristic analysis against medical indicators.

FINDINGS: FOBS-C demonstrated high translation equivalence (0.833-1), content validity (0.800-0.933), internal consistency (0.897), and test-retest reliability (0.860). Convergent validity was supported by statistically significant correlations between FOBS scores, heart rate, skin conductance changes, as well as scores from WDEQ-A, CAQ, EPDS, and GAD-7. Known-group validity was observed with different medical indicators. FOBS-C cutoff points indicating severe fear of childbirth were identified as 65, 68, 71, and 56, respectively, against WDEQ-A ≥ 85, CAQ ≥ 52, preference for C-section birth, and preference for analgesia, demonstrating known-group validity. A cutoff point of 65 showed the FOBS-C's strongest known-group validity.

CONCLUSION: The FOBS-C exhibits robust psychometric properties, making it a valid screening tool for identifying severe fear of birth. Establishing a cutoff point at 65 facilitates effective screening.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app