Objectives: Severe fear of childbirth (FOC) has adverse consequences for mother and child. This study aimed to update the global prevalence of severe FOC in low-risk pregnant women. Materials and Methods: Observational studies published in English were obtained through PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Wiley Online, and Google Scholar databases up to April 2020. After reviewing the title and introduction, the quality of the articles that had full text and met the inclusion criteria of the study was checked with the JBI checklist. Then, the final extracted data were entered into the STATA software. The overall prevalence of severe FOC and fear in subgroups were obtained using meta-analysis. Tests of publication bias and sensitivity analysis were also performed. Results: Overall, 27 observational studies were included (26014 participants). The global prevalence of severe FOC was 16% (95% CI: 14%–19%). The subgroup analysis showed that after 2015, the prevalence of fear was higher than before (%18 versus %14). The results also showed a higher prevalence of fear in women with a diploma and lower compared to women with a university education (%19 versus %13), in single/divorced women compared to married/cohabitation women (%21 versus %15), in nulliparous women compared to multiparous women (%17 versus %14) and in women experiencing the second trimester of pregnancy compared to women in the third trimester of pregnancy (%23 versus %14). Conclusions: The global prevalence of severe FOC was 16%. Diagnostic, preventive, therapeutic and follow-up strategies are needed to reduce fear in all countries.

Objectives: The existence of a valid scale of fear of childbirth (FOC) has an effective role in identifying women at risk, so this study was conducted to determine the validation of the Slade FOC scale for pregnancy in a sample of Iranian women. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, initially, the Slade scale was translated based on a forward-backward approach. For sampling among pregnant women in Anbarabad city, 820 pregnant women were selected by multistage cluster sampling method. The research questionnaire included (a) demographic information, (b) Slade FOC scale (new scale), (c) childbirth attitude questionnaire (validated scale), and (d) Wijma scale (validated scale). Face validity, content validity, construct validity (using factor analysis), convergent validity, and concurrent validity (by calculating the present scale correlation with childbirth attitude questionnaire and Wijma scale were used to determine the validity of the scale. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), split-half, and stability (test-retest) methods were used for scale reliability. SPSS software version 22 and LISREL version 8.8 were used for data analysis. Results: Target population comments were applied in face validity, the impact score of face validity was in the range of 1.6-4.5. Content validity ratio (CVR) values (81%-100%) and content validity index (CVI) value (83%) were acceptable. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) showed that the scale had four factors which include uncertainty and injury with 18.39%, the unprofessional behavior of maternity staff with 14.51%, the unpredictable with 14.44%, and negative emotions with 10.54% of the variance. The scale had acceptable convergent validity and the correlation between items and the total score was between 0.41-0.63. The correlation coefficient between the present scale with the childbirth attitude questionnaire and Wijma scale was 0.81 and 0.79, respectively. The reliability result showed an acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84), acceptable split-half (0.71 for the first half of scale and 0.78 for the second half of scale) and acceptable stability (r = 0.78). Conclusions: The results showed that the Slade scale has acceptable validity and reliability. Therefore, this scale can be used in scientific research and screening for FOC.

Background: Knowledge-sharing behaviors among academic members in Iran were believed to enhance organizational sustainability. However, the current status of these behaviors was unknown due to the lack of a valid scale to assess them. Objectives: The present study was conducted to validate the Knowledge Sharing Behavior Scale (KSBS) among faculty members of nursing and midwifery schools in Iran. Methods: This research was a cross-sectional study of scale psychometric type. The samples included 640 faculty members of nursing and midwifery schools across the country in 2021. Validation was performed through face validity, content validity by determining content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR), construct validity by determining exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), concurrent validity by determining the correlation between KSBS and Knowledge Management Questionnaire (KMQ) and Tacit Knowledge Sharing Scale (TEKS), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α coefficient), and stability reliability (test-retest) were determined. SPSS version 21 and LISREL version 8.8 were used for data analysis. The significance level was 0.01. Results: Items were edited based on the comments of the target community. Content validity ratio for 28 questions ranged from 0.73 to 1, and all items had I-CVI values greater than 0.78. The results of EFA showed four factors, and CFA approved the construct homogeneity. The correlation coefficient of KSBS with KMQ and TEKS were 0.72 and 0.87, respectively. Cronbach α coefficients for the whole scale and factors were higher than 0.90. Conclusions: Knowledge Sharing Behavior Scale was a valid and reliable scale to measure knowledge-sharing behaviour in the Iranian academic community.