Objectives: The existence of a valid scale of fear of childbirth (FOC) has an effective role in identifying women at risk, so this study was conducted to determine the validation of the Slade FOC scale for pregnancy in a sample of Iranian women. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, initially, the Slade scale was translated based on a forward-backward approach. For sampling among pregnant women in Anbarabad city, 820 pregnant women were selected by multistage cluster sampling method. The research questionnaire included (a) demographic information, (b) Slade FOC scale (new scale), (c) childbirth attitude questionnaire (validated scale), and (d) Wijma scale (validated scale). Face validity, content validity, construct validity (using factor analysis), convergent validity, and concurrent validity (by calculating the present scale correlation with childbirth attitude questionnaire and Wijma scale were used to determine the validity of the scale. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), split-half, and stability (test-retest) methods were used for scale reliability. SPSS software version 22 and LISREL version 8.8 were used for data analysis. Results: Target population comments were applied in face validity, the impact score of face validity was in the range of 1.6-4.5. Content validity ratio (CVR) values (81%-100%) and content validity index (CVI) value (83%) were acceptable. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) showed that the scale had four factors which include uncertainty and injury with 18.39%, the unprofessional behavior of maternity staff with 14.51%, the unpredictable with 14.44%, and negative emotions with 10.54% of the variance. The scale had acceptable convergent validity and the correlation between items and the total score was between 0.41-0.63. The correlation coefficient between the present scale with the childbirth attitude questionnaire and Wijma scale was 0.81 and 0.79, respectively. The reliability result showed an acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84), acceptable split-half (0.71 for the first half of scale and 0.78 for the second half of scale) and acceptable stability (r = 0.78). Conclusions: The results showed that the Slade scale has acceptable validity and reliability. Therefore, this scale can be used in scientific research and screening for FOC.

Background: Knowledge-sharing behaviors among academic members in Iran were believed to enhance organizational sustainability. However, the current status of these behaviors was unknown due to the lack of a valid scale to assess them. Objectives: The present study was conducted to validate the Knowledge Sharing Behavior Scale (KSBS) among faculty members of nursing and midwifery schools in Iran. Methods: This research was a cross-sectional study of scale psychometric type. The samples included 640 faculty members of nursing and midwifery schools across the country in 2021. Validation was performed through face validity, content validity by determining content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR), construct validity by determining exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), concurrent validity by determining the correlation between KSBS and Knowledge Management Questionnaire (KMQ) and Tacit Knowledge Sharing Scale (TEKS), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α coefficient), and stability reliability (test-retest) were determined. SPSS version 21 and LISREL version 8.8 were used for data analysis. The significance level was 0.01. Results: Items were edited based on the comments of the target community. Content validity ratio for 28 questions ranged from 0.73 to 1, and all items had I-CVI values greater than 0.78. The results of EFA showed four factors, and CFA approved the construct homogeneity. The correlation coefficient of KSBS with KMQ and TEKS were 0.72 and 0.87, respectively. Cronbach α coefficients for the whole scale and factors were higher than 0.90. Conclusions: Knowledge Sharing Behavior Scale was a valid and reliable scale to measure knowledge-sharing behaviour in the Iranian academic community.

Objectives: According to the evidence, 35% of women have experienced sexual violence worldwide. This study aimed to develop and validate an electronic scale for sexual violence experiences (SVE) in Iranian women. Materials and Methods: In this mixed-method study, we conducted an item pool by reviewing the existing sexual violence scales in the literature and sent the items to the expert team for initial consensus. Then, we measured the validity and reliability of the developed scale. The samples included 808 women (age range: 15-45 years) in Kerman province from October to December 2020. Results: The final scale consisted of 43 items. Face validity was achieved by applying the views of the target community. The content validity results were acceptable. The correlation coefficient between the Sexual Experience Questionnaire (SEQ) and the Domestic Violence Questionnaire (DVQ) with the SVE was 0.68 and 0.51, respectively. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (χ2 =27973.72, df=903, and P=0.001) identified eight factors. The results also showed good reliability (Cronbach’s alpha=0.9, Pearson’s correlation r=0.9, P=0.001). Conclusions: Since the SVE had good validity and reliability, the scale can be regarded as a suitable tool for measuring sexual violence among Iranian women.

Background: Engagement in e-learning is undesirable in Iranian students, and there is no valid scale to assess its status. Objectives: This study was conducted to validate the scale of "participation in e-learning scale" among students of nursing and midwifery schools in Iran. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, validation was conducted on 1014 students from 51 universities of medical sciences in Iran. The samples were selected using the cluster sampling method in 2022. The scale was translated into Persian by the forward-backward method. Validity was evaluated as face validity, content validity, and construct validity. Face validity was assessed by qualitative interviews with the participants and by calculating the impact scores of each item. Content validity was assessed using the content validity ratio and content validity index. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used for construction reliability. Convergent validity was calculated by average variance extract (AVE) and composite reliability (CR). Concurrent validity was checked by comparing the correlation between the Lee scale and the educational engagement questionnaire of Schaufeli’s study. Reliability was evaluated by calculating Cronbach's alpha and test-retest reliability. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 18 and LISREL version 8.8. The level of significance was considered 0.05. Results: In this study, 579 (66.86%), 569 (65.7%), and 679 (78.41%) of the students were under the age of 22 years, women, and passing an undergraduate or associate degree, respectively. Based on the results, the items were revised with face validity. The content validity ratio value of the questionnaire items was estimated between 0.76 and 1, and the content validity index was estimated at 0.79. According to the factor analysis, four factors were extracted ((1) psychological motivation; (2) management and effective communication; (3) cognitive problem-solving; and (4) peer collaboration). Regarding the convergence validity results, AVE values were greater than 0.5, and CR values were greater than 0.7. The concurrent validity results were calculated at 0.61. The Cronbach's alpha obtained for the whole scale was 0.95. Conclusions: Our findings showed that the e-learning scale is valid and reliable for measuring the participation of nursing and midwifery students in e-learning, and this scale can improve academic engagement in online classes in nursing and midwifery schools.