ArticleBMC public health2022
Reliability and validity evaluation of the appropriate antibiotic use self-efficacy scale for Chinese adults.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the Barriers to Physical Activity during Pregnancy Scale (BPAPS) in pregnant women.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Inpatients' willingness to accept antibiotic intravenous-to-oral switch therapy and its influencing factors: a qualitative study based on the Health Belief Model.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, practices, and self-efficacy of hemodialysis nurses in vascular access management: a multicenter cross-sectional survey in Anhui.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Self-medication and non-adherence to antibiotic prescription and associated factors among Myanmar migrants in Thailand: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Article
- The association between social support and quality of life in patients with severe stroke: a chain mediation analysis of resilience and self-efficacy.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Differences in immunity and survival among non-small cell lung cancer patients: a gut microbiota perspective.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Translation and validation of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised Indicator (BSS-RI) in Chinese.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Scale of employees' initiative for proactive health: development and validity testing.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice of coronary heart disease patients towards antithrombotic therapy.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Development and preliminary evaluation of the Chinese adult dietary behavior scale.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Hypertension Belief Assessment Tool.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Development and preliminary evaluation of the Comprehensive Health Self-Assessment Questionnaire (CHSAQ) for individuals in the Chinese People Liberation Army.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Scale of Effects of Social Media on Eating Behaviour and research of its influencing factors.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Translation and validation of the Chinese version of the maternal postpartum stress scale.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAntibiotic resistance is one of the greatest threats to global public health. Inappropriate use of antibiotics can lead to an increase in antibiotic resistance. Individual self-efficacy in the appropriate use of antibiotics plays a key role, especially in China where the population has easy access to antibiotics. However, there are no tools available to assess the self-efficacy of appropriate antibiotic use for Chinese adults. We aimed to translate and develop a Chinese version of the Appropriate Antibiotic Use Self-Efficacy Scale (AAUSES), and validate its reliability and validity.
methodsA total of 659 adults were recruited to participate in the questionnaire. The original version scale was first translated into Chinese using the backward and forward translation procedures. The internal consistency reliability of the scale was measured by the Cronbach alpha coefficient, the test-retest reliability, and the corrected item-total correlation. The validity of the scale was assessed by the content validity index, exploratory factor analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis.
resultsThe content validity index of the scale was 0.96. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) supported a 4-factor structure of the translated questionnaire, and the discriminant validity of the scale was good. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed in the model fitness index, the chi-square degree of freedom was 2.940, the goodness-of-fit index(GFI) was 0.929, the incremental fit index (IFI) was 0.908, the comparative fit index(CFI) was 0.906, root mean square error of approximation(RMSEA) was 0.077, and standardized root mean residual (SRMR) was 0.0689, and the model fitting indexes were all in the acceptable range. Cronbach alpha coefficient for the scale was 0.910. The test-retest reliability was 0.947, and the corrected item-total correlations for the items ranged from 0.488 to 0.736. Self-efficacy for appropriate antibiotic use in adults varied by education, occupation, income, place of residence, and whether or not they had heard of antibiotic resistance.
conclusionsThe results indicated that the Chinese version of the AAUSES had good reliability and validity. Therefore, it can be considered a tool to evaluate the appropriate antibiotic use self-efficacy of adults in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.