Cross-cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Childbirth Fear Prior to Pregnancy Scale in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The fear of childbirth can range from apprehension to intense fear (tokophobia), with serious consequences for maternal health. Therefore, a standardized scale is needed to measure the fear of childbirth before pregnancy. Objective: This study aimed to adapt the Childbirth Fear Prior to Pregnancy (CFPP) scale to the Brazilian context and analyse its validity and reliability. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was completed by 146 nursing students at two Brazilian universities. A committee of experts evaluated the cross-cultural adaptation of the CFPP scale. Construct validity was verified using item-total correlations and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). The validity of divergent concurrent criteria was evaluated by associating the score obtained using the Brazilian CFPP with the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Reliability was analysed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and test-retest. Results: Correlation analysis revealed a predominance of moderate inter-item correlation and strong item-total correlation (>0.62). The EFA indicated that all items related to a single factor, with factor loadings and communalities >0.5. These results reinforced the one-dimensionality of the Brazilian CFPP. The validity of divergent concurrent criteria was confirmed via weak correlations with DASS-21 scores (r = 0.32, p < 0.001). The Cronbach’s alpha (0.86) and the intra-class correlation coefficient (0.99) indicated reliability and strong temporal stability, respectively. Conclusion: The Brazilian version of the CFPP provides evidence of validity and reliability to measure fear of childbirth before pregnancy in young adults in Brazil.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".