Testing the psychometric properties of Mandarin version of the fertility problem inventory (M-FPI) in an infertile Chinese sample
Research and Education Center in Sexual Health, Harbin Medical University, No 157 Bao Jian Road, Nan Gang, Harbin, China. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology
(Impact Factor: 1.88).
12/2011; 32(4):173-81. DOI: 10.3109/0167482X.2011.609950
The Fertility Problem Inventory (FPI) is an instrument to measure infertility-related stress, and has been widely used in a range of clinical settings. It has been translated into several languages, however there is no validated Mandarin version. The present study tests the psychometric properties of the Mandarin version of FPI (M-FPI). A hospital sample of 223 infertile Chinese couples (223 men and 223 women) completed the M-FPI along with other measures including demographics, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale, which were used to assess the reliability and validity of the Mandarin version of FPI. Results showed that the M-FPI was best reduced to a five? factor solution, and all 46 items of the M-FPI showed moderate to high internal consistency. In addition, the test of convergent and discriminant validity from this study indicated satisfactory results. These results indicate that the M-FPI as an instrument is reliable and valid for use with infertile Chinese couples in clinical assessment.
Available from: Afsaneh Keramat
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Infertility has potentially inappropriate effects on quality of life in infertile couples. Various general and specific questionnaires have been structured for assessing different aspects of quality of life in infertile men, women, or couples. The present systematic review was designed to assess these questionnaires and also identify different factors affecting infertile couples based on the aforesaid questionnaires.
The research strategy involved general and specific terms in relation to couples's infertility and their quality of life. A review was done for studies published from 1982 to 2012 that were indexed in Medline, ISI Web of Science and Scopus as well as abstract books on this subject. We also corresponded with the authors of the references in related studies for introducing more resources and references.
In all reviewed studies, different aspects of the quality of life in couples were evaluated including sexual, psychological, social, communicational, environmental, occupational, medical, as well as economical ones. In total, after initial screening of all studies, 10 general and 2 specific questionnaires were retrieved. Although no meta-analysis was found in the review, infertility had a negative effect on quality of life in couples.
This study revealed that some general questionnaires such as SF-36 and WHO-QOL were mostly used for assessing quality of life in infertile couples and some specific questionnaires such as FERTI-QoL and Fertility Problem Inventory were rarely used. Thus, it seems that the evaluation of quality of life in infertile couples needs valid instruments for measurement.
Journal of Reproduction and Infertility 03/2013; 14(3):110-119.
Available from: Zaira Donarelli
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The factor structure of the Fertility Problem Inventory (FPI) and its invariance across gender were examined in Italian couples undergoing infertility treatment. About 1000 subjects (both partners of 500 couples) completed two questionnaires prior to commencing infertility treatment at a private Clinic in Palermo, Italy. Confirmatory Factor Analysis demonstrated that the original factor structure of the FPI was partially confirmed. Two correlated factors (Infertility Life Domains and Importance of Parenthood) were obtained via a post hoc Exploratory Factor Analysis. Finally, the invariance of this factor structure across gender was confirmed. The study supported the relevance of two interrelated factors specific to infertility stress which could help clinicians to focus on the core infertility-related stress domains of infertile couples.
Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology 04/2015; 36(2):1-8. DOI:10.3109/0167482X.2015.1034268 · 1.88 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: AimTo develop and psychometrically test a brief self-report to assess the amount of infertility-related stress; to investigate how infertility-related stress was associated to socio-demographics, causes of infertility and emotional distress.Background
Infertility exerts a stress effect on both personal and interpersonal areas. Due to the burden of multiple assessments in fertility clinics, there is the need for very brief and easy to administer measures of the stressful impact of infertility on the intrapersonal and interpersonal life domains.DesignThe study had a psychometric, cross-sectional design.Method
Between January - December 2013, a total of 597 Italian infertile patients (58·6% women), recruited at the time of initial infertility consultation, completed the Infertility-Related Stress Scale. A subsample of 200 participants (50% women) also completed self-reports of anxiety and depression. A subsample of 40 patients completed again the Infertility-Related Stress Scale at a 4-week follow-up visit.ResultsConfirmatory factor analyses supported the proposed two-factor model of infertility stress affecting intrapersonal and interpersonal life domains. Both dimensions showed good reliability and were associated in expected ways with emotional distress. Patients with above-threshold levels of anxiety and depression showed higher infertility stress in both domains and particularly in the intrapersonal area. Infertility stress was significantly higher in women than in men in the intrapersonal domain.Conclusion
The Infertility-Related Stress Scale showed evidence of validity and reliability. This new, brief self-report can assist fertility clinic staff in identifying those patients who need support to overcome the stressful impact of infertility on intrapersonal and interpersonal domains.
Journal of Advanced Nursing 10/2015; DOI:10.1111/jan.12830 · 1.74 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.