Reliability and validity evaluation of the chinese revision of the attitude towards adult vaccination scale

BACKGROUND: Although vaccination is one of the critical interventions to address global health issues, inadequate vaccination rates has become an international challenge. Vaccine hesitancy is the key to affecting inadequate vaccination rates. According to the WHO SAGE working group’s definition, vaccine hesitancy refers to delaying or refusing vaccination and has been ranked as one of the top 10 health threats. There has yet to be a scale that evaluates vaccination attitudes among Chinese adults. However, an attitude quantity, the adult vaccination attitude scale, has been developed to assess adult vaccination attitudes and reasons for vaccine hesitancy. OBJECTIVE: The Adult Attitudes to Vaccination Scale (ATAVAC) was initially developed by Professor Zoi Tsimtsiou et al. This study aimed to analyze the structure of the Chinese version of the ATAVAC and explore the relationship between adult vaccination attitudes, e-health literacy, and medical distrust. METHODS: After obtaining author permission for the initial scales, the study was translated using the Brislin back-translation method. 693 adults were enrolled to the study. To validate this hypothesis, participants finished the socio-demographic questionnaire, the Chinese version of the ATAVAC, the electronic Health Literacy Scale (e-HEALS) and the Medical Mistrust Index (MMI). The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to examine the underlying structure of the factors of the Chinese version of the Adult Vaccination Attitude Scale and to measure its reliability and validity. RESULTS: The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the Chinese version of the ATAVAC was 0.885, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from 0.850 to 0.958 for each dimension. The content validity index was 0.90, and the retest reliability was 0.943. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) supported the 3-factor structure of the translation instrument, and the scale had good discriminant validity. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed a degree of freedom of 1.219, a model fit index (GFI) of 0.979, a normative fit index (NFI) of 0.991, a Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) of 0.998, a comparability index (CFI) of 0.998 and a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.026. CONCLUSION: The results show that the Chinese version of the ATAVAC has demonstrated good reliability and validity. Hence, it can be used as an effective tool to assess vaccination attitudes among Chinese adults.