Abstract
Study design
Psychometric study.
Objectives
To i) describe the translation process and ii) explore the data completeness, targeting, reliability and aspects of validity of the Swedish version of Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale (s-MSES).
Settings
Community rehabilitation program.
Methods
Ninety-two program participants and 42 peer mentors with spinal cord injury (SCI) in Active Rehabilitation training programs (enrolled in the International Project for the Evaluation of activE Rehabilitation (Inter-PEER)) were included. The s-MSES was completed online, once for program participants and twice for peer mentors. The translation process was based on guidelines and involved researchers, clinicians and consumers.
Results
Minor linguistic adaptations were made. Ninety-one percent obtained a total score. As expected, peer mentors exhibited ceiling effects in all subscales. Cronbach´s alpha for the total scale was 0.92 (subscales 0.74–0.83). The intraclass correlation coefficient was excellent for the total and subscale scores (0.78–0.91). The s-MSES exhibited sensitivity to changes and there were no systematic changes between evaluation points. The s-MSES correlated significantly and positively with life satisfaction and resilience, and negatively with depression/anxiety.
Conclusion
The s-MSES was translated through a rigorous, consumer-involved process ensuring accurate linguistic translation and cultural adaptation. Our results support the data completeness, targeting, reliability and aspects of validity of the s-MSES. The s-MSES can thus be considered suitable to assess self-efficacy in persons with SCI in community rehabilitation settings. The now available Swedish version of the MSES will facilitate national research, clinical evaluations and international comparisons.
Sponsorship
Not applicable.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
All data were archived according to the Swedish Act concerning the Ethical Review of Research Involving Humans and are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
van Diemen T, Crul T, van Nes I, Geertzen JH, Post MW. Associations between self-efficacy and secondary health conditions in people living with spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;98:2566–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2017.03.024.
van Diemen T, Craig A, van Nes IJW, Stolwijk-Swuste JM, Geertzen JHB, Middleton J, et al. Enhancing our conceptual understanding of state and trait self-efficacy by correlational analysis of four self-efficacy scales in people with spinal cord injury. BMC Psychol. 2020;8:108 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-00474-6.
Craig A, Tran Y, Guest R, Middleton J. Trajectories of Self-Efficacy and Depressed Mood and Their Relationship in the First 12 Months Following Spinal Cord Injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100:441–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.07.442.
Coker J, Cuthbert J, Ketchum JM, Holicky R, Huston T, Charlifue S. Re-inventing yourself after spinal cord injury: a site-specific randomized clinical trial. Spinal Cord. 2019;57:282–92. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-018-0230-8.
Liu T, Xie S, Wang Y, Tang J, He X, Yan T, et al. Effects of App-Based Transitional Care on the Self-Efficacy and Quality of Life of Patients With Spinal Cord Injury in China: Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021;9:e22960 https://doi.org/10.2196/22960.
Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84:191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.
Bhattarai M, Jin Y, Smedema SM, Cadel KR, Baniya M. The relationships among self-efficacy, social support, resilience, and subjective well-being in persons with spinal cord injuries. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77:221–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14573.
Geyh S, Nick E, Stirnimann D, Ehrat S, Michel F, Peter C, et al. Self-efficacy and self-esteem as predictors of participation in spinal cord injury—an ICF-based study. Spinal Cord. 2012;50:699–706. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2012.18.
Middleton J, Tran Y, Craig A. Relationship between quality of life and self-efficacy in persons with spinal cord injuries. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88:1643–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.09.001.
Craig A, Tran Y, Siddall P, Wijesuriya N, Lovas J, Bartrop R, et al. Developing a model of associations between chronic pain, depressive mood, chronic fatigue, and self-efficacy in people with spinal cord injury. J Pain. 2013;14:911–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2013.03.002.
Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M Generalised self-efficacy scale. In: Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M, editors. Measures in health psychology: a user’s portfolio causal and control beliefs. Windsor: Nfer-Nelson; 1995, p. 35–37
Amtmann D, Bamer AM, Cook KF, Askew RL, Noonan VK, Brockway JA. University of Washington self-efficacy scale: a new self-efficacy scale for people with disabilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:1757–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2012.05.001.
Marquez MA, Speroni A, Galeoto G, Ruotolo I, Sellitto G, Tofani M, et al. The Moorong Self Efficacy Scale: translation, cultural adaptation, and validation in Italian; cross sectional study, in people with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord Ser Cases. 2022;8:22 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41394-022-00492-z.
Rajati F, Ghanbari M, Hasandokht T, Hosseini SY, Akbarzadeh R, Ashtarian H. Persian version of the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale: psychometric study among subjects with physical disability. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39:2436–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1226404.
Gounelle M, Cousson-Gelie F, Nicolas B, Kerdraon J, Gault D, Tournebise H, et al. French cross-cultural adaptation and validity of the Moorong Self-Efficacy scale: the MSES-FR, a measure of Self-Efficacy for French people with spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2021:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2021.2003452.
Divanoglou A, Tasiemski T, Jörgensen S. INTERnational Project for the Evaluation of “activE Rehabilitation” (inter-PEER) - a protocol for a prospective cohort study of community peer-based training programmes for people with spinal cord injury. BMC Neurol. 2020;20:14 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-019-1546-5.
Middleton JW, Tate RL, Geraghty TJ. Self-Efficacy and Spinal Cord Injury: Psychometric Properties of a New Scale. Rehabil Psychol. 2003;48:281–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550.48.4.281.
Brooks J, Smedema SM, Tu W-M, Eagle D, Catalano D, Chan F. Psychometric Validation of the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale in People With Spinal Cord Injury. Rehab Couns Bull. 2014;58:54–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034355214523506.
Miller SM. The measurement of self-efficacy in persons with spinal cord injury: psychometric validation of the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31:988–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280802378025.
Middleton JW, Tran Y, Lo C, Craig A. Reexamining the Validity and Dimensionality of the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale: Improving Its Clinical Utility. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97:2130–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2016.05.027.
Wahman K, Nilsson E, Antepohl W, Samuelsson K, Åkesson E, Kuhlefelt Sandberg A, et al. Translation and validation of two International Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Data Sets-a modified process. Spinal Cord Ser Cases. 2019;5:105 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41394-019-0250-4.
Fekete C, Post MWM, Bickenbach J, Middleton J, Prodinger B, Selb M, et al. A Structured Approach to Capture the Lived Experience of Spinal Cord Injury: Data Model and Questionnaire of the International Spinal Cord Injury Community Survey. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;96:5–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000000622.
Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Third edition. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited; 2013.
Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Fifth edition. New York, New York: Oxford University Press; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199685219.003.0011.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical Methods for assessing Agreement between two Methods of Clinical Measurement. The Lancet. 1986:307–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.
Lexell JE, Downham DY. How to assess the reliability of measurements in rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;84:719–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.phm.0000176452.17771.20.
Anthoine E, Moret L, Regnault A, Sébille V, Hardouin JB. Sample size used to validate a scale: a review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:176 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955.014.0176-2.
Terwee CB, Prinsen CAC, Chiarotto A, Vet HCW de, Bouter LM, Alonso J, et al. COSMIN methodology for assessing the content validity of PROMs: User manual version 1.0. Available at: https://www.cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/COSMIN-methodology-for-content-validity-user-manual-v1.pdf.
Guest R, Craig A, Tran Y, Middleton J. Factors predicting resilience in people with spinal cord injury during transition from inpatient rehabilitation to the community. Spinal Cord. 2015;53:682–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2015.32.
Cijsouw A, Adriaansen JJE, Tepper M, Dijksta CA, van Linden S, de Groot S, et al. Associations between disability-management self-efficacy, participation and life satisfaction in people with long-standing spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2017;55:47–51. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2016.80.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank all participants in the study. We also thank RG Active Rehabilitation and Veronika Lyckow for being valuable partners in this initiative. We acknowledge Erik Berndtsson (EB), Emelie Butler Forslund (EBF), Ph.D., Richard Levi (RL), Ph.D., Ulrica Lundström (UL), Ph.D., Erika Nilsson (EN), BA for being involved in the translation process. Furthermore, we acknowledge professional translator Gunilla Lyckow, Vasiliki Panteli for assistance in data collection, and Noel Grehan (NG) and Tobias Lauritzen (TL) for assisting in the translation process. EB was responsible for contacting the peer mentors and coordinated the data collection together with AD.
Funding
This study was funded in part by the Promobilia Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
AD conceived the inter-PEER and is the principal investigator. AD, JaMa and SJ designed the present study and AD and JaMa performed the statistical analyses which were interpreted together with SJ. JaMa, SJ, and AD drafted the manuscript. JM reviewed the manuscript and provided comments and revisions. SJ was responsible for the translation process together with AD. All authors critically reviewed the manuscript and have read and approved the final version.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethical approval
All participants received written and verbal information about the Inter-PEER, and all gave their written informed consent before enrolment. Ethical Approval was provided by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (approval number 2018/313-31/5; 2019-01032). The Declaration of Helsinki for research on humans was followed throughout the research process.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Mangold, J., Divanoglou, A., Middleton, J.W. et al. The Swedish version of the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale (s-MSES) – translation process and psychometric properties in a community setting. Spinal Cord 62, 71–78 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-023-00948-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-023-00948-5