The adaptation of the infertility distress scale into Chinese: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity.

BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM: Women with infertility frequently experience unique psychological challenges. However, the commonly used universal distress scales may not adequately represent their actual psychological state.

OBJECTIVE

This study focused on the translation and cultural adaptation of Infertility Distress Scale (IDS) to Chinese, and the subsequent evaluation of its validity and reliability.

METHODS

Using Brislin translation model, the IDS was translated and culturally adapted for Chinese women. Then, a questionnaire survey was conducted with 592 infertile women using convenient sampling for assessing whether our translated Chinese IDS version was valid and reliable.

RESULTS

This Chinese IDS version included four dimensions involving 23 items. The item-content validity index (I-CVI) was 0.90-1.00, with the Scale-CVI for Universal Agreement (S-CVI/UA) of 0.91. Additionally, the Scale-CVI for Average (S-CVI/Ave) was 0.99 on average. Upon exploratory factor analysis, four common factors were identified, which explained 68.08% of variance. Moreover, a good fit was obtained by confirmatory factor analysis. In addition, the correlation coefficient between the subjective experience dimension and the Kessler 10 Psychological Distress Scale was 0.64, and the correlation coefficient between the Infertility Distress Scale and the Fertility Problem Inventory was 0.68. The overall scale reliability (Cronbach’s α) was 0.95.

CONCLUSION

While the validated Chinese IDS offers significant insights into infertility-related distress, its applicability should consider demographic variances and the contextual limitations of the study, advocating for caution in generalizing findings across broader populations.