ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Cultural adaptation, validation and evaluation of the psychometric properties of Childbirth Experience Questionnaire version 2.0 in the Spanish context.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of Childbirth Experience Questionnaire 2.0.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral instruments have been designed to assess the childbirth experience. The Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) is one of the most widely used tools. There is an improved version of this instrument, the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ 2.0), which has not been adapted or validated for use in Spain. The aim of present study is to adapt the CEQ 2.0 to the Spanish context and evaluate its psychometric properties.
methodsThis research was carried out in 2 stages. In the first stage, a methodological study was carried out in which the instrument was translated and back-translated, content validity was assessed by 10 experts (by calculating Aiken's V coefficient) and face validity was assessed in a sample of 30 postpartum women. In the second stage, a cross-sectional study was carried out to evaluate construct validity by using confirmatory factor analysis, reliability evaluation (internal consistency and temporal stability) and validation by known groups.
resultsIn Stage 1, a Spanish version of the CEQ 2.0 (CEQ-E 2.0) was obtained with adequate face and content validity, with Aiken V scores greater than 0.70 for all items. A final sample of 500 women participated in Stage 2 of the study. The fit values for the obtained four-domain model were RMSEA = 0.038 [95% CI: 0.038-0.042], CFI = 0.989 [95% CI: 0.984-0.991], and GFI = 0.990 [95% CI: 0.982-0.991]. The overall Omega and Cronbach's Alpha coefficients were 0.872 [95% CI: 0.850-0.891] and 0.870 [95% CI: 0.849-0.890] respectively. A coefficient of intraclass correlation of 0.824 [95% CI: 0.314-0.936] (p ≤ 0.001) and a concordance coefficient of 0.694 [95% CI: 0.523-0.811] were obtained.
conclusionsThe Spanish version of CEQ 2.0 (CEQ-E 2.0), has adequate psychometric properties and is a valid, useful, and reliable instrument for assessing the childbirth experience in Spanish women.
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.