OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the IIFAS among a multiethnic population in Singapore.
METHODS: A cross-sectional research design was used on a sample of 417 antenatal women. The internal consistency and stability of the IIFAS were evaluated using Cronbach's α and test-retest reliability. Known-group comparisons discriminated certain group differences in a predictable way. A series of exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) was conducted to test the factor structure of the IIFAS using the maximum likelihood and principal axis factoring. The number of factors was selected according to theoretical and statistical considerations. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was further performed to validate the factor structure constructed in the prior EFA.
RESULTS: The IIFAS had a Cronbach's α and Pearson correlation of 0.79 and 0.85, respectively. The known-group comparisons among certain groups were supported. The EFA results showed that the 3-factor structure produced the most interpretable and theoretical sense. A second-order CFA was conducted to confirm the construct dimensionality of the 15-item IIFAS, with satisfactory fit indices found.
CONCLUSION: The 15-item IIFAS is a psychometrically sound measurement tool that health care professionals can use to understand the diverse infant feeding attitudes and knowledge among different ethnic groups in order to provide breastfeeding interventions that are culturally sensitive.
METHODS: Patients fulfilling the International Headache Society (IHS) criteria for TN were prospectively interviewed for their demographic and clinical data. Pain intensity was rated with a visual analog scale (VAS), anxiety and depression were determined by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and QoL was assessed by the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire. Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, and Spearman correlation tests were used to test for differences considering a significance level of P < .05.
RESULTS: Of the 75 included patients, 52 (69.3%) were women with a mean ± standard deviation (SD) onset age of 52.0 ± 12.7 years, and 57.3% were Chinese, 24.0% Malay, and 18.7% Indian. Pain was more common on the right side (69.3%) and in the maxillary and mandibular divisions. VAS scores for pain at its worst were higher in anxious/borderline anxious patients compared to non-anxious patients (89.5 ± 15.9 vs 80.9 ± 17.2, respectively; P < .05), and VAS scores for pain at its least were higher in depressed/borderline depressed subjects compared to non-depressed subjects (38.4 ± 25.8 vs 23.0 ± 19.2, respectively; P < .05). Chinese patients had lower VAS scores for pain at its least compared to Indian patients (19.7 ± 16.1 vs 39.9 ± 24.7; P < .01). TN patients scored lower in all eight domains of the SF-36 compared to the general population. Indian patients had lower scores in role limitations due to physical health (8.9 ± 23.2 vs 49.4 ± 43.8; P < .01) and social function (56.3 ± 13.6 vs 76.5 ± 23.6; P < .01) than Chinese patients, and Malay patients had lower mental health scores compared to Chinese patients (59.1 ± 19.5 vs 73.0 ± 21.0; P < .01).
CONCLUSION: Clinical characteristics of TN patients were similar to those of other populations. There were differences in pain ratings and QoL between TN patients of different ethnicities, as well as between those with anxiety and depression.
METHODS: We conducted a nationally representative survey among 1925 adults aged 18-79 years of Chinese, Malay, Indian or other ethnicity. Participants reported socio-demographic characteristics and completed the PMH-I along with measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and psychological distress. Construct validity of the PMH-I was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis and concurrent validity was tested through correlation with other psychological measures. Normative PMH values and differences in population subgroups were estimated.
RESULTS: The six-factor-higher-order structure of the PMH-I comprising six subscales of general coping, emotional support, spirituality, interpersonal skills, personal growth and autonomy and global affect was confirmed. Concurrent validity was shown through significant positive correlation of the total PMH score and its subscales with HRQoL and an inverse correlation with psychological distress. Weighted age, gender and ethnicity-specific norms were derived for the Singapore population. Total PMH was significantly higher in participants aged over 40 years as compared with 18-29 year olds and in non-Chinese ethnic groups as compared with Chinese. These differences were observed for all PMH-I subscales, with the exception of emotional support and interpersonal skills score differences by age. In contrast, gender, marital status, and education level were significantly associated with some of the subscales, but not with total PMH.
CONCLUSIONS: These results support the psychometric properties of the PMH-I in a multi-ethnic Asian population sample. The generalizable population-based norms support the application of the PMH-I for measuring mental health and assessing its determinants within the Singapore general population.