پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 1,089 |
| تعداد مقالات | 9,995 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 26,442,323 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 7,286,559 |
Measurement Model of Women’s Preferences in Obstetrician and Gynecologist Selection in the Private Sector: Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis | ||
| International Journal of Community Based Nursing & Midwifery | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 8، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 30، تیر 2020، صفحه 150-163 اصل مقاله (1.11 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/ijcbnm.2020.82278.1049 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Masood Setoodefar1؛ Hamed Tabesh1؛ Fatemeh Tara2؛ Saeed Eslami1؛ Fatemeh Heshmati Nabavi3؛ Najmeh Valizadeh Zare3؛ Seyyed Hassan Taheri4؛ Mohammad Reza Rajabzadeh Moghaddam5؛ Kobra Etminani* 1 | ||
| 1Department of Medical Informatics, School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; | ||
| 2Patient Safety Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; | ||
| 3Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; | ||
| 4Department of Computer Sciences, School of Engineering, Khayyam University, Mashhad, Iran; | ||
| 5Department of Pure Mathematics, Center of Excellence in Analysis on Algebraic Structures (CEAAS), Ferdowsi University, Mashhad, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Background: The purpose of this study is to construct and validate a measurement model of women’s preferences in Obstetrician and Gynecologist (OB/GYN) selection in the private sector of non-clinical parameters. Methods: This methodological study included 462 respondents in OB/GYN’s offices to a researcher-made questionnaire. The patients visited 57 offices of OB/GYNs in the city of Mashhad in Iran and completed women’s preferences in OB/GYN selection questionnaire over a 2-month period from January to February 2018. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted to verify the instrument’s construct validity. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to test whether the data fit our hypothesized model obtained from EFA model. Results: The first draft of the questionnaire was prepared with 118 items based on literature review. The outcome of content validity assessment was a 51-item questionnaire. Scale-Content Validity Index (S-CVI) turned out to be 0.80. The results of EFA yielded an instrument with 33 items in six domains, which explained 52.657% of the total variance of the questionnaire. With performing CFA, the 6-factor model with 29 items demonstrated a good fit with the data (CFI=0.952, CMIN/DF=1.613, RMSEA=0.036). Availability and Accessibility, Communicational Skills, Office Environment, Recommendation by Others, Special Services, and Cost and Insurance were found to define the women’s preferences in OB/GYN selection in private sector, Iran. Conclusion: The developed measurement model considers the patient’s preferences that influence decision-making process on OB/GYN selection. It can provide useful knowledge for OB/GYNs and policymakers to design appropriate and efficient marketing strategies according to the consumer preferences priority. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| Factor analysis؛ Obstetric and gynecologic patients؛ Patient preferences؛ Women’s health services | ||
|
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
|
||
| مراجع | ||
|
1 Van de Walle S, Marien S. Choice in public
services: A multilevel analysis of doctor
choice in 22 countries. 2017:49;1471-93.
2 Kim K, Ahn S, Lee B, et al. Factors
associated with patients’ choice of
physician in the Korean population:
Database analyses of a tertiary hospital.
PloS One. 2018;13:e0190472.
3 Murray CJL, Evans DB. Health systems
performance assessment: debates,
methods and empiricism. Geneva: World
Health Organization. 2003.
4 Janssen SM, Lagro-Janssen AL.
Physician’s gender, communication style,
patient preferences and patient satisfaction
in gynecology and obstetrics: a systematic
review. Patient Education and Counseling.
2012;89:221-6.
5 Vos HMM. Risk factors in women’s
health in different stages of life. [thesis].
Netherlands: Radboud University Medical
Centre Nijmegen; 2014.
6 Amir H, Hazan M, Hasson J, et al.
Gender preference of obstetricians and
gynecologists by ultra-orthodox Jewish
women. Open Access Scientific Reports.
2012;1(10).
7 Amir H, Gophen R, Amir Levy Y,
et al. Obstetricians nd gynecologists:
which characteristics do Israeli lesbians
prefer? The Journal of Obstetrics and
Gynaecology Research. 2015;41:238-98.
8 Amer-Alshiek, Alshiek T, Amir Levy
YJ, et al. Israeli Druze women’s sex
preferences when choosing obstetricians
and gynecologists. Israel Journal of Health
Policy Research. 2015;4:13.
9 Amir H, Abokaf H, Levy YA, et al.
Bedouin Women’s Gender Preferences
When Choosing Obstetricians and
Gynecologists. Journal of Immigrant and
Minority Health. 2018;20:51-8.
10 Willis E, King D, Dwyer J, et al. Women
and Gynaecological Cancer: Gender and
the Doctor–Patient Relationship. Topoi.
2017;36:509-19.
11 Makam A, Mallappa Saroja CS,
Edwards G. Do women seeking care
from obstetrician-gynaecologists prefer
to see a female or a male doctor?
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
2010;281:443-7.
12 Balayla J. Male physicians treating
female patients: issues, controversies and
gynecology. McGill Journal of Medicine.
2011;13:72.
13 Schnatz PF, Murphy JL, O’Sullivan DM,
Sorosky JI. Patient choice: comparing
criteria for selecting an obstetriciangynecologist
based on image, gender,
and professional attributes. American
Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology.
2007;197:548.
14 McLean M, Al Yahyaei F, Al Mansoori
M, et al. Muslim women’s physician
preference: beyond obstetrics and
gynecology. Health Care for Women
International. 2012;33:849-76.
15 Amouzagar S, Mojaradi Z, Izanloo A,
et al. Qualitative examination of health
tourism and its challenges. International
Journal of Travel Medicine and Global
Health. 2016;4:88-91.
16 Gravetter FJ, Forzano LAB. Research
methods for the behavioral sciences. 6th
ed. US: Cengage; 2017.
17 Sharif Nia H, Pahlevan Sharif S, Lehto
RH, et al. Development and psychometric
evaluation of a Persian version of the
Death Depression Scale-Revised: a
cross-cultural adaptation for patients
with advanced cancer. Japanese Journal
of Clinical Oncology. 2017;47:713-9.
18 Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an
acceptable indicator of content validity?
Appraisal and recommendations. Research
in Nursing & Health. 2007;30:459-67.
19 Waltz CF, Strickland O, Lenz ER.
Measurement in nursing and health
research. 4th ed. New York: Springer;
2010.
20 Kerlinger FN. Foundations of behavioral
research. 3rd ed. US: Holt, Rinehart,
Winston; 1986.
21 Mammen PM, Asokan MK, Russell S, et
al. The confirmatory factor analysis of the
original brief intellectual disability scale
and alternative models. Indian Journal of
Psychological Medicine. 2018;40:29-32.
22 Fung K. The initial development and
content validity of an Asperger’s
Syndrome self-screening instrument for
adults. [thesis]. Canada: University of
Saskatchewan; 2011.
23 Al-Briek A, Al-Barrak A, Al-Johi K, et al.
Factors that Influence Patients in Choosing
Their Treating Physicians in the Private
Sector in Saudi Arabia. American Journal
of Public Health Research. 2018;6:173-81.
24 Perrault EK, Smreker KC. What can we
learn from physicians’ online biographies
to help in choosing a doctor? Not much. A
content analysis of primary care physician
biographies. Journal of Communication in
Healthcare. 2013;6:122-7.
25 Rogo-Gupta LJ, Haunschild C, Altamirano
J, et al. Physician Gender Is Associated
with Press Ganey Patient Satisfaction
Scores in Outpatient Gynecology.
Women’s Health Issues. 2018;28:281-5.
26 Bal MD, Yılmaz SD, Beji, NZ, Uludağ
S. Muslim women choice for gender of
obstetricians and gynecologist in Turkey.
Journal of Human Sciences. 2014;11:64-73.
27 Kashgary A, Alsolaimani R, Mosli
M, Faraj S. The role of mobile devices
in doctor-patient communication: A
systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare.
2017;23:693-700.
28 Hamelin ND, Nikolis A, Armano J, et
al. Evaluation of factors influencing
confidence and trust in the patientphysician
relationship: a survey of patient
in a hand clinic. Chirurgie de la Main.
2012;31:83-90.
29 Lee Y. Patients’ perception and adherence
to vaginal dilator therapy: a systematic
review and synthesis employing symbolic
interactionism. Patient Preference and
Adherence. 2018;12:551-60.
30 Shahawy S, Deshpande NA, Nour NM.
Cross-cultural obstetric and gynecologic
care of Muslim patients. Obstetrics &
Gynecology. 2015;126:969-73.
31 Magnezi R, Bergman LC, Urowitz S.
Would your patient prefer to be considered
your friend? patient preferences in
physician relationships. Health Education
& Behavior. 2015;42:210-9.
32 Johnson AM, Schnatz PF, Kelsey AM,
Ohannessian CM. Do women prefer
care from female or male obstetriciangynecologists?
A study of patient gender
preference. The Journal of the American
Osteopathic Association. 2005;105:369-79.
33 Amir H, Tibi Y, Groutz A, et al.
Unpredicted gender preference of
obstetricians and gynecologists by Muslim
Israeli-Arab women. Patient Education
and Counseling. 2012;86:259-63.
34 Cooley DO, Madupu V. How did you
find your physician? An exploratory
investigation into the types of information
sources used to select physicians.
International Journal of Pharmaceutical
and Healthcare Marketing. 2009;3:46-58.
35 Nan Liu, Finkelstein SR, Kruk ME,
Rosenthal D. When Waiting to See a
Doctor Is Less Irritating: Understanding
Patient Preferences and Choice Behavior
in Appointment Scheduling. Management
Science. 2018;64:1975-2471.
36 Victoor A, Delnoij DM, Friele RD,
Rademakers JJ. Determinants of patient
choice of healthcare providers: a scoping
review. BMC Health Services Research.
2012;12:272.
37 Yahanda AT, Lafaro KJ, Spolverato G,
Pawlik TM. A systematic review of the
factors that patients use to choose their
surgeon. World Journal of Surgery.
2016;40:45-55. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,183 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,294 |
||
