Validation and Refinement of the Sense of Coherence Scale for a French Population: Observational Study.

French SOC Sense of Coherence scale manageability primary care patients promoting reliability resilience salutogenesis sense of coherence validation validity validscale well-being

Journal

Interactive journal of medical research
ISSN: 1929-073X
Titre abrégé: Interact J Med Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101598421

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
16 Jul 2024
Historique:
received: 26 06 2023
accepted: 11 03 2024
revised: 28 01 2024
medline: 16 7 2024
pubmed: 16 7 2024
entrez: 16 7 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Salutogenesis focuses on understanding the factors that contribute to positive health outcomes. At the core of the model lies the sense of coherence (SOC), which plays a crucial role in promoting well-being and resilience. Using the validscale Stata command, we aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the French version of the 3-dimension 13-item SOC questionnaire (SOC-13), encompassing the comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness dimensions. We also aimed to determine if a refined scale, assessed through this method, exhibits superior psychometric properties compared to the SOC-13. A sample of 880 consecutive primary care patients recruited from 35 French practices were asked to complete the SOC-13. We tested for internal consistency and scalability using the Cronbach α and Loevinger H coefficients, respectively, and we tested for construct validity using confirmatory factor analysis and goodness-of-fit indices (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] and comparative fit index [CFI]). Of the 880 eligible patients, 804 (91.4%) agreed to participate (n=527, 65.6% women; median age 51 years). Cronbach α and Loevinger H coefficients for the SOC-13 were all <0.70 and <0.30, respectively, indicating poor internal consistency and poor scalability (0.64 and 0.29 for comprehensibility, 0.56 and 0.26 for manageability, and 0.46 and 0.17 for meaningfulness, respectively). The RMSEA and CFI were >0.06 (0.09) and <0.90 (0.83), respectively, indicating a poor fit. By contrast, the psychometric properties of a unidimensional 8-item version of the SOC questionnaire (SOC-8) were excellent (Cronbach α=0.82, Loevinger H=0.38, RMSEA=0.05, and CFI=0.97). The psychometric properties of the 3-dimension SOC-13 were poor, unlike the unidimensional SOC-8. A questionnaire built only with these 8 items could be a good candidate to measure the SOC. However, further validation studies are needed before recommending its use in research.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Salutogenesis focuses on understanding the factors that contribute to positive health outcomes. At the core of the model lies the sense of coherence (SOC), which plays a crucial role in promoting well-being and resilience.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
Using the validscale Stata command, we aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the French version of the 3-dimension 13-item SOC questionnaire (SOC-13), encompassing the comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness dimensions. We also aimed to determine if a refined scale, assessed through this method, exhibits superior psychometric properties compared to the SOC-13.
METHODS METHODS
A sample of 880 consecutive primary care patients recruited from 35 French practices were asked to complete the SOC-13. We tested for internal consistency and scalability using the Cronbach α and Loevinger H coefficients, respectively, and we tested for construct validity using confirmatory factor analysis and goodness-of-fit indices (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] and comparative fit index [CFI]).
RESULTS RESULTS
Of the 880 eligible patients, 804 (91.4%) agreed to participate (n=527, 65.6% women; median age 51 years). Cronbach α and Loevinger H coefficients for the SOC-13 were all <0.70 and <0.30, respectively, indicating poor internal consistency and poor scalability (0.64 and 0.29 for comprehensibility, 0.56 and 0.26 for manageability, and 0.46 and 0.17 for meaningfulness, respectively). The RMSEA and CFI were >0.06 (0.09) and <0.90 (0.83), respectively, indicating a poor fit. By contrast, the psychometric properties of a unidimensional 8-item version of the SOC questionnaire (SOC-8) were excellent (Cronbach α=0.82, Loevinger H=0.38, RMSEA=0.05, and CFI=0.97).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The psychometric properties of the 3-dimension SOC-13 were poor, unlike the unidimensional SOC-8. A questionnaire built only with these 8 items could be a good candidate to measure the SOC. However, further validation studies are needed before recommending its use in research.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39012689
pii: v13i1e50284
doi: 10.2196/50284
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e50284

Informations de copyright

©Paul Sebo, Benoit Tudrej, Augustin Bernard, Bruno Delaunay, Alexandra Dupuy, Claire Malavergne, Hubert Maisonneuve. Originally published in the Interactive Journal of Medical Research (https://www.i-jmr.org/), 16.07.2024.

Auteurs

Paul Sebo (P)

Institut universitaire de Médecine de Famille et de l'Enfance (University Institute for Primary Care), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Benoit Tudrej (B)

University College of General Medicine, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, France.

Augustin Bernard (A)

Institut universitaire de Médecine de Famille et de l'Enfance (University Institute for Primary Care), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Bruno Delaunay (B)

Institut universitaire de Médecine de Famille et de l'Enfance (University Institute for Primary Care), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Alexandra Dupuy (A)

Institut universitaire de Médecine de Famille et de l'Enfance (University Institute for Primary Care), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Claire Malavergne (C)

Institut universitaire de Médecine de Famille et de l'Enfance (University Institute for Primary Care), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Hubert Maisonneuve (H)

Institut universitaire de Médecine de Famille et de l'Enfance (University Institute for Primary Care), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
University College of General Medicine, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, France.

Classifications MeSH