IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i10p5451-d558130.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity and Reliability of a COVID-19 Stigma Scale Using Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis in a Sample of Egyptian Physicians: E16-COVID19-S

Author

Listed:
  • Aya Mostafa

    (Department of Community, Environmental, and Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo 11566, Egypt)

  • Nayera S. Mostafa

    (Department of Community, Environmental, and Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo 11566, Egypt)

  • Nashwa Ismail

    (Department of Community, Environmental, and Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo 11566, Egypt)

Abstract

Introduction: To date, a universal validated and specific tool for assessing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) stigma among healthcare workers is lacking. We adapted a SARS stigma scale that was developed using the Berger HIV scale for use as a COVID-19 stigma scale and evaluated its psychometric properties among Egyptian physicians. Methods: We administered the 17-item SARS stigma scale in an anonymous online questionnaire among 509 Egyptian physicians recruited via convenience sampling during a cross-sectional study in June 2020. Exploratory factor analysis was performed on half of the sample. Confirmatory factor analysis of the resulting model was done using structural equation modeling on the other half. Scale reliability was examined using Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency. Convergent construct validity was assessed using regression models to examine the association between the adapted COVID-19 stigma scale and relevant factors. Results: Exploratory factor analysis yielded 16 items (E16-COVID19-S) that supported a three-factor structure: personalized stigma (8 items); concerns of disclosure and public attitudes (5 items); and negative experiences (3 items). Cronbach’s α was 0.909 for the total scale and 0.907, 0.663, and 0.789 for the three subscales. E16-COVID19-S was confirmed to have good model fit (comparative fit index = 0.964; root mean squared error of approximation = 0.056). E16-COVID19-S was independently associated with physicians’ younger age, lower qualification, working in an isolation hospital, and self-stigma, whether the scale was treated as categorical or continuous. Conclusions: E16-COVID19-S exhibited good internal consistency and construct validity among this sample of Egyptian physicians. These adequate psychometric properties make the E16-COVID19-S scale appropriate for use by researchers and practitioners.

Suggested Citation

  • Aya Mostafa & Nayera S. Mostafa & Nashwa Ismail, 2021. "Validity and Reliability of a COVID-19 Stigma Scale Using Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis in a Sample of Egyptian Physicians: E16-COVID19-S," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-13, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:10:p:5451-:d:558130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/10/5451/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/10/5451/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Makoto Tsukuda & Yoshiyasu Ito & Keisuke Nojima & Tomonori Kayano & Junko Honda, 2022. "Development and Validation of the COVID-19-Related Stigma Scale for Healthcare Workers (CSS-HCWs)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-11, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:10:p:5451-:d:558130. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.