Dataset Information

COVID-19 Public Stigma Scale (COVID-PSS): development, validation, psychometric analysis and interpretation

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, social stigma towards COVID-19 infection has become a major component of public discourse and social phenomena. As such, we aimed to develop and validate the COVID-19 Public Stigma Scale (COVID-PSS).

Design and setting

National-based survey cross-sectional study during the lockdown in Thailand.

Participants

We invited the 4004 adult public to complete a set of measurement tools, including the COVID-PSS, global fear of COVID-19, perceived risk of COVID-19 infection, Bogardus Social Distance Scale, Pain Intensity Scale and Insomnia Severity Index.

Methods

Factor structure dimensionality was constructed and reaffirmed with model fit by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and non-parametric item response theory (IRT) analysis. Psychometric properties for validity and reliability were tested. An anchor-based approach was performed for classifying the proper cut-off scores.

Results

After factor analysis, IRT analysis and test for model fit, we created the final 10-item COVID-PSS with a three-factor structure: stereotype, prejudice and fear. Face and content validity were established through the public and experts’ perspectives. The COVID-PSS was significantly correlated (Spearman rank, 95% CI) with the global fear of COVID-19 (0.68, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.70), perceived risk of COVID-19 infection (0.79, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.80) and the Bogardus Social Distance Scale (0.50, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.53), indicating good convergent validity. The correlation statistics between the COVID-PSS and the Pain Intensity Scale and Insomnia Severity Index were <0.2, supporting the discriminant validity. The reliability of the COVID-PSS was satisfactory, with good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α of 0.85, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.86) and test–retest reproducibility (intraclass correlation of 0.94, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.96). The proposed cut-off scores were as follows: no/minimal (≤18), moderate (19–25) and high (≥26) public stigma towards COVID-19 infection.

Conclusions

The COVID-PSS is practical and suitable for measuring stigma towards COVID-19 in a public health survey. However, cross-cultural adaptation may be needed.

SUBMITTER: Nochaiwong S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8568532 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveCorrectly understanding and evaluating the level of public risk perception toward public health emergencies not only helps experts and decision-makers understand the public's preventative health behaviors to these emergencies but also enhances their risk information communication with the public. The aim of this study was to develop a risk perception scale for public health emergencies and test its validity and reliability during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsGuided by the theoretical model of risk perception, an initial scale was generated through literature review, group meetings, resident interviews, and expert consultation. A pretest and item screening were then conducted to develop a formal risk perception scale for public health emergencies. Finally, the reliability and validity of the scale were validated through a questionnaire survey of 504 Chinese adults.ResultsThe final scale had 9 items. The content validity index of the scale was 0.968, and the content validity index of individual items ranged from 0.83 to 1.00. Three common factors, dread risk perception, severe risk perception, and unknown risk perception, were extracted for exploratory factor analysis, and together they explained 66.26% of the variance in the score. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the model had a satisfactory fit, where χ 2/df = 1.384, the goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.989, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.028, root mean square residual (RMR) = 0.018, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.995, normed fit index (NFI) = 0.982, and non-normed fit index (NNFI) = 0.990. The correlations between dimensions ranged from 0.306 to 0.483 (P < 0.01). Cronbach's α was 0.793 for the total scale and ranged between 0.687 and 0.801 for the individual dimensions. The split-half coefficient was 0.861 for the total scale and ranged from 0.727 to 0.856 for induvial dimensions. The test-retest coefficient was 0.846 for the total scale and ranged from 0.843 to 0.868 for induvial dimensions.ConclusionThe developed scale for the risk perception of public health emergencies showed acceptable levels of reliability and validity, suggesting that it is suitable for evaluating residents' risk perception of public health emergencies.

Project description:ObjectiveSelf-stigma is the internalization of negative public attitudes and is often experienced by patients with epilepsy (PWE). Greater self-stigma is associated with lower self-esteem and hinders therapeutic behavior. The study aims were to develop the Epilepsy Self-Stigma Scale (ESSS) to assess self-stigma in PWE and to examine the scale's reliability and validity.MethodsWe created a test scale based on items from an existing stigma scale and the results of a previous qualitative analysis we conducted. We recruited 200 outpatients from departments specializing in epilepsy (psychiatry, neurology, and pediatric neurology) at four facilities in Tokyo and Saitama prefecture, Japan, between September and December 2020. Participants also completed the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II).ResultsQuestionnaires were returned from 102 participants (response rate: 51%). After excluding two participants with incomplete questionnaires, data for 100 participants were analyzed (53 women, 47 men; mean age [standard deviation]: 39.86 [17.45] years). Exploratory factor analysis extracted eight items loading on three factors: internalization of stigma, societal incomprehension, and confidentiality. Cronbach's α for all items and each factor demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (α = 0.76-0.87). Test-retest reliability was confirmed using data from 21 participants who completed the scale twice (r = 0.72 to 0.90). ESSS total scores and subscale scores correlated with RSES and BDI-II scores (r = -0.30 to 0.55). The ESSS demonstrated substantial constructive validity. However, total scores did not significantly correlate with objective physician assessment of self-stigma.SignificanceThe results showed that the eight-item ESSS has high reliability and validity. This scale could facilitate the examination of factors associated with self-stigma in PWE, which could inform the development of effective interventions for reducing stigma.

Project description:HIV-related stigma has negative consequences for infected people's lives and is a barrier to HIV prevention. Therefore valid and reliable instruments to measure stigma are needed to enable mapping of HIV stigma. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the HIV stigma scale in a Swedish context with regard to construct validity, data quality, and reliability.The HIV stigma scale, developed by Berger, Ferrans, and Lashley (2001), was distributed to a cross-sectional sample of people living with HIV in Sweden (n = 194). The psychometric evaluation included exploratory factor analysis together with an analysis of the distribution of scores, convergent validity by correlations between the HIV stigma scale and measures of emotional well-being, and an analysis of missing items and floor and ceiling effects. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α.The exploratory factor analysis suggested a four-factor solution, similar to the original scale, with the dimensions personalised stigma, disclosure concerns, negative self-image, and concerns with public attitudes. One item had unacceptably low loadings and was excluded. Correlations between stigma dimensions and emotional well-being were all in the expected direction and ranged between -0.494 and -0.210. The instrument generated data of acceptable quality except for participants who had not disclosed their HIV status to anybody. In line with the original scale, all subscales demonstrated acceptable internal consistency with Cronbach's α 0.87-0.96.A 39-item version of the HIV stigma scale used in a Swedish context showed satisfactory construct validity and reliability. Response alternatives are suggested to be slightly revised for items assuming the disclosure of diagnosis to another person. We recommend that people that have not disclosed should skip all questions belonging to the dimension personalised stigma. Our analysis confirmed construct validity of the instrument even without this dimension.