ArticleScientific reports2024
Design and psychometric evaluation of the collaborative coping with infertility questionnaire in candidate of assisted reproductive techniques.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evaluating couples' coping with infertility and its impact on their mental health is valuable in designing supportive programs. Since infertility is a shared problem in married life, coping with it requires collaborative coping strategies. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to design and psychometrically evaluate the collaborative coping with infertility questionnaire (CCIQ) in candidates of assisted reproductive techniques (ART). The exploratory factor analysis of a 27-item questionnaire designed based on the Likert scale in the Persian language was evaluated through the principal component analysis method in a cross-sectional study conducted on 200 couples who volunteered for ART. The cut-off point of factor loadings was considered 0.4. Furthermore, the criterion validity of the questionnaire was evaluated using a 12-item revised Fertility Adjustment Scale (R-FAS) and its relationship with the score of the CCIQ. Moreover, the internal consistency of the questionnaire was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha correlation coefficient. In the exploratory factor analysis, 20 items with a factor loading above 0.4 were extracted under three factors. The three extracted factors with a value above one explained 43.78% of the variance of CCIQ. The factor loading of the accepted items ranged between 0.402 and 0.691. External reliability was confirmed with Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.98. The relationship between CCIQ and R-FAS score was significant (p < 0.0001). The results of the study showed that the 20-item CCIQ enjoyed acceptable validity and reliability in the three dimensions of 'dynamic interaction,' 'reorganizing married life goals,' and 'perception about infertility,' which can be used to evaluate collaborative coping with infertility questionnaire in ART candidates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.