ArticleBMC nursing2026
Chinese version of the labour ward job satisfaction scale for midwives: translation, cultural adaptation and psychometric validation.
Article in BMC nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundMidwives' job satisfaction is essential to guarantee maternal and infant delivery safety and improve the quality of midwifery services. Along with the transformation of childbirth models and the rapid development of midwifery specialty, there is a lack of clinically applicable assessment instruments with rigorous psychometric validation tailored to domestic labour ward settings in China, which impedes accurate evaluation of current job satisfaction among labour ward midwives.
objectiveThis study aimed to translate and conduct cross-cultural adaptation of the English translation of the original Spanish scale version Labour Ward Job Satisfaction Scale for Midwives (LWJSS-M), and evaluate the psychometric properties of its Chinese version.
methodsThis cross-sectional methodological study was conducted from March to May 2026 across 23 hospitals in Jiangxi and Hubei Provinces, China. A total of 456 midwives were recruited via convenience sampling for questionnaire investigation. Following Brislin's translation guidelines, the English translation of the original Spanish scale Labour Ward Job Satisfaction Scale for Midwives (LWJSS-M) was translated into Chinese through forward translation, back-translation and cross-cultural adaptation procedures. Subsequently, psychometric properties of the Chinese version were tested. Construct validity was examined by exploratory factor analysis (EFA, Group A, n = 228) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA, Group B, n = 228). Convergent validity, discriminant validity, internal consistency, split-half reliability and test-retest reliability were assessed in the present study.
resultsThe Chinese version of the Labour Ward Job Satisfaction Scale for Midwives contained 37 items distributed across 5 dimensions. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) extracted five factors, accounting for a cumulative explained variance of 60.072%. The overall Cronbach's α coefficient of the scale was 0.936, and the Cronbach's α values for each dimension ranged from 0.889 to 0.932; the split-half reliability was 0.791, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC, test-retest reliability) was 0.957. The scale-level content validity index (S-CVI) reached 0.993. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) yielded satisfactory model fit indices: CMIN/DF = 1.107, CFI = 0.986, TLI = 0.985, RMSEA = 0.022, SRMR = 0.042.
conclusionThe Chinese version of the Labour Ward Job Satisfaction Scale for Midwives has sound psychometric properties. This scale can effectively measure job satisfaction among Chinese labour ward midwives and serves as a reliable instrument for nursing administrators to conduct relevant assessments.
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.