2017
DOI: 10.24191/jchs.v2i2.5886
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of the Communication Skills Attitude Scale (CSAS) Questionnaire in a Cohort of Malaysian Medical Students

Abstract: Introduction: The Communication Skills Attitude Scale (CSAS) assesses medical students’ attitudes towards learning communication skills and had been widely utilised all over the world. This questionnaire has 26 items framed within two subscales. This study aimed to examine the validity and reliability of the CSAS among medical students in Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM). Methods: This was a cross sectional questionnaire validation study among 171 first year medical students from UiTM. The CSAS had undergone c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The findings from this study support the hypothesis that the psychometric properties of the scale would improve if adapted and translated into the Malay language and administered among students who speak Malay as their first language. This is evident from the improved internal consistency of the NAS in the CSAS-Malay (α = 0.614), as compared to the previous study by Baharudin et al (α = 0.565) [ 24 ]. However, compared to the other studies, the internal consistency of the NAS in the CSAS-Malay is lower but still acceptable ( Table 4 ) [ 8 , 9 , 11 , 13 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 62%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The findings from this study support the hypothesis that the psychometric properties of the scale would improve if adapted and translated into the Malay language and administered among students who speak Malay as their first language. This is evident from the improved internal consistency of the NAS in the CSAS-Malay (α = 0.614), as compared to the previous study by Baharudin et al (α = 0.565) [ 24 ]. However, compared to the other studies, the internal consistency of the NAS in the CSAS-Malay is lower but still acceptable ( Table 4 ) [ 8 , 9 , 11 , 13 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…Internationally, the CSAS has been adapted and translated into many languages [ 8 , 9 , 11 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. Baharudin et al adapted and validated the CSAS English version in a cohort of University Teknologi MARA (UiTM) students, but the internal consistency of the NAS was low [ 24 ]. The majority of these students speak Malay as their first language.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the item 20 was suggested to be excluded in 4 studies [10,23,26,32], items 3 [23,26], 13 [23,33], 15 [10,33], and 22 [23,34] in 2 studies and the items 11 [33] and 17 [10] in one study. All of the items that did not met the criteria for validity in our study were excluded in at least…”
Section: The Association With Personality and Attitude Toward Communimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The CSAS has already been a subject of several validation studies in different countries, but their results are inconsistent. While researchers from Turkey, Spain, Germany and Malaysia replicated the two-factor solution [ 12 – 15 ], those from Norway, Iran and Korea presented three-factorial [ 16 ], four-factorial [ 17 ] and five-factorial [ 18 ] solutions, respectively. Moreover, even in case of studies confirming the two-factor model, some items landed on opposite subscales than in the original version.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interestingly, initial factor analysis based on Kaiser criterion (eigenvalues greater than 1) revealed many potential variants of initial solutions in the aforementioned papers: five-factorial [ 16 ], six-factorial [ 11 – 13 , 18 ], seven-factorial [ 14 ] and eight-factorial [ 15 ]. However, apart from one research team [ 15 ], authors did not determine the number of factors to keep, for instance, using highly recommended Horn’s parallel analysis [ 19 , 20 ]. Instead, their decisions were mostly based on less accurate methods, like Kaiser criterion, analysis of the scree plot, or theoretical assumptions provided by Rees et al [ 11 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%