2020
DOI: 10.1080/01443615.2020.1821354
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the City Birth Trauma Scale (CityBiTS)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

5
14
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
5
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the current study, the two-factor model composed of the birth-related symptoms and general symptoms factors was fitting well the data, according to all fit indices. This two-factor solution corresponds with the structure of the original scale (Ayers et al, 2018) and other validation studies of the City BiTS questionnaire (Bayrı Bingöl et al, 2020;Caparros-Gonzalez et al, 2021;Handelzalts et al, 2018;Nakić Radoš et al, 2020). However, aligned with the Croatian validation study (Nakić Radoš et al, 2020), a bifactor model, with a general factor and two specific factors of birth-related symptoms and general symptoms provided a best fit to the data.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 67%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the current study, the two-factor model composed of the birth-related symptoms and general symptoms factors was fitting well the data, according to all fit indices. This two-factor solution corresponds with the structure of the original scale (Ayers et al, 2018) and other validation studies of the City BiTS questionnaire (Bayrı Bingöl et al, 2020;Caparros-Gonzalez et al, 2021;Handelzalts et al, 2018;Nakić Radoš et al, 2020). However, aligned with the Croatian validation study (Nakić Radoš et al, 2020), a bifactor model, with a general factor and two specific factors of birth-related symptoms and general symptoms provided a best fit to the data.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 67%
“…The City BiTS was subsequently validated in other languages, notably in Hebrew (Handelzalts et al, 2018); in Croatian (Nakić Radoš et al, 2020); in Spanish (Caparros-Gonzalez et al, 2021); and in Turkish (Bayrı Bingöl et al, 2020). All four studies confirmed the two-factor structure (Bayrı Bingöl et al, 2020; Caparros-Gonzalez et al, 2021; Handelzalts et al, 2018; Nakić Radoš et al, 2020). Moreover, an excellent data fit emerged with a bifactor model with the general factor and two specific factors of the birth-related symptoms and general symptoms, indicating that subscale scores bring additional value to the City BiTS total score (Nakić Radoš et al, 2020).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding the reported mode of birth in the included studies, four studies examined one mode of birth, i.e., vaginal birth [ 36 , 54 , 55 ] or emergency caesarean section (emergency CS) [ 56 ], whereas two studies examined two modes of birth, i.e., vaginal birth and caesarean section (CS) [ 22 , 57 ]. Six studies differentiated between vaginal birth, operative vaginal birth and CS [ 37 , 38 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 ], whereas three studies differentiated between vaginal birth, elective caesarean section (elective CS) and emergency CS [ 62 , 63 , 64 ]. Eleven studies distinguished between vaginal birth, operative vaginal birth, elective CS and emergency CS [ 18 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some were based on the DSM-IV criteria, including the Posttraumatic Diagnostic Scale (PDS) [ 9 , 22 , 38 , 57 , 59 ], PTSD Symptom Scale—self report (PSS-SR) [ 4 , 18 , 68 ], Traumatic Event Scale (TES) [ 36 , 60 , 61 , 66 ], Impact of Event Scale (IES) [ 36 , 58 , 67 ], Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL) [ 65 ], Post-traumatic checklist scale (PCLS) [ 56 ], and Primary Care PTSD Screen (PC-PTSD-IV) [ 70 ]. The City Birth Trauma Scale (CityBits) [ 62 , 64 , 67 , 69 , 74 ], PTSD-short scale [ 54 ] and Perinatal PTSD Questionnaire (PPQ) [ 37 , 55 , 73 , 75 ] were based on the DSM-V criteria.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation