IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0185433.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of a pregnancy planning measure for Arabic-speaking women

Author

Listed:
  • Eman Almaghaslah
  • Roger Rochat
  • Ghada Farhat

Abstract

Background: The prevalence of unplanned pregnancy in Saudi Arabia has not been thoroughly investigated. Objective: To conduct a psychometric evaluation study of the Arabic version of the London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy (LMUP). Methods: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the LMUP, we conducted a self-administered online survey among 796 ever-married Saudi women aged 20–49 years, and a re-test survey among 24 women. The psychometric properties evaluated included content validity measured by content validity index (CVI), structural validity assessed by exploratory factor analysis (EFA), substantive validity assessed by hypothesis testing, contextual stability for the test-retest assessed by weighted Kappa, and internal consistency assessed by Cronbach’s alpha. Results: The psychometric analysis of the Arabic version of LMUP exhibited valid and reliable properties. The CVIs for individual items and at the scale level were >0.7. EFA confirmed a unidimensional extraction of the scale item. Hypothesis testing confirmed expected associations. The tool was stable with weighted kappa = 0.78 and Cronbach’s alpha = 0.88. Conclusion and recommendations: In this study, the validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the LMUP were confirmed according to well-known psychometric criteria. This LMUP version can be used in research studies among Arabic-speaking women to measure unplanned pregnancy and investigate correlates and outcomes related to unplanned pregnancy.

Suggested Citation

  • Eman Almaghaslah & Roger Rochat & Ghada Farhat, 2017. "Validation of a pregnancy planning measure for Arabic-speaking women," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0185433
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0185433
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0185433&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0185433?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Warren Miller & Jo Jones & David Pasta, 2016. "An implicit ambivalence-indifference dimension of childbearing desires in the National Survey of Family Growth," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 34(7), pages 203-242.
    2. Corinne Rocca & Suneeta Krishnan & Geraldine Barrett & Mark Wilson, 2010. "Measuring pregnancy planning," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 23(11), pages 293-334.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Joline Goossens & Sofie Verhaeghe & Ann Van Hecke & Geraldine Barrett & Ilse Delbaere & Dimitri Beeckman, 2018. "Psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy in women with pregnancies ending in birth," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, April.
    2. Adina Y Lang & Jennifer A Hall & Jacqueline A Boyle & Cheryce L Harrison & Helena Teede & Lisa J Moran & Geraldine Barrett, 2019. "Validation of the London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy among pregnant Australian women," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adina Y Lang & Jennifer A Hall & Jacqueline A Boyle & Cheryce L Harrison & Helena Teede & Lisa J Moran & Geraldine Barrett, 2019. "Validation of the London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy among pregnant Australian women," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, August.
    2. Diane Morof & Jody Steinauer & Sadia Haider & Sonia Liu & Philip Darney & Geraldine Barrett, 2012. "Evaluation of the London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy in a United States Population of Women," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(4), pages 1-7, April.
    3. Joline Goossens & Sofie Verhaeghe & Ann Van Hecke & Geraldine Barrett & Ilse Delbaere & Dimitri Beeckman, 2018. "Psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy in women with pregnancies ending in birth," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0185433. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.