METHODS: We used the 11-item Duke Social Support Index to assess perceived social support through a face-to-face interview. Higher scores indicate better social support. Linear regression analysis was carried out to determine the factors that influence perceived social support by adapting the conceptual model of social support determinants and its impact on health.
RESULTS: A total of 3959 respondents aged ≥60 years completed the Duke Social Support Index. The estimated mean Duke Social Support Index score was 27.65 (95% CI 27.36-27.95). Adjusted for confounders, the factors found to be significantly associated with social support among older adults were monthly income below RM1000 (-0.8502, 95% CI -1.3523, -0.3481), being single (-0.5360, 95% CI -0.8430, -0.2290), no depression/normal (2.2801, 95% CI 1.6666-2.8937), absence of activities of daily living (0.9854, 95% CI 0.5599-1.4109) and dependency in instrumental activities of daily living (-0.3655, 95% CI -0.9811, -0.3259).
CONCLUSION: This study found that low income, being single, no depression, absence of activities of daily living and dependency in instrumental activities of daily living were important factors related to perceived social support among Malaysian older adults. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 63-67.
METHODS: A questionnaire development and validation study was conducted. The resilience domains and items were identified and generated through a literature review. The content validation was carried out by content experts and the content validity index (CVI) was calculated. The face validation was performed by medical officers and the face validity index (FVI) was calculated. The final MeRS was administered to 167 medical officers, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability analysis were performed to assess MeRS's factorial structure and internal consistency.
RESULTS: Four domains with 89 items of medical professionals' resilience were developed. Following that, the content and face validation was conducted, and a total of 41-items remained for construct validation. EFA extracted four factors, namely growth, control, involvement, and resourceful, with a total of 37 items. The items' CVI and FVI values were more than 0.80. The final MeRS's items had factor loading values ranged from 0.41 to 0.76, and the Cronbach's alpha values of the resilience domains ranged from 0.72 to 0.89.
CONCLUSIONS: MeRS is a promising scale for measuring medical professionals' resilience as it showed good psychometric properties. This study provided validity evidence in terms of content, response process, and internal structure that supported the validity of MeRS in the measurement of resilience domains among medical professionals.