A Scale to Measure the Joy in Work of Doctors: Development, Validity, and Reliability

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study is to develop a scale and evaluate its' validity and reliability to measure the joy in work of doctors.Methods: Based on literature review and panel discussion, the scale framework and item pool were determined. Next, the items were modified by two rounds of expert consultation. Then the pre-investigation was applied and the formal version of scale was formed. Last, the reliability and validity of the scale were tested with 426 physicians.Results: The scale was composed of four dimensions: work autonomy needs, competency identification needs, competency perception needs and work relationship needs. Each dimension had 7 items, and both reliability and validity were acceptable. The Cronbach α coefficient and half-reliability coefficient of the whole scale were 0.954 (>0.9) and 0.974 (>0.9). The Spearman correlations of item-total score ranged from 0.556 to 0.749, indicating a good-item total score correlation. The χ 2/ df, RMSEA, RMR, GFI, CFI, and TLI, CFA of the maximum likelihood method supported a good fit with the model.Conclusions: Based on the self-determination theory, this study develops a scale to measure the joy in work of doctors. It has good validation and reliability, which is useful for doctors and medical institutions to take steps to improve happiness.

A latent profile analysis of doctors’ joy in work at public hospitals

“…The scale was scored on a 5-point Likert scale with a possible score range of 28 to 140, with higher scores indicating higher joy in work for public school doctors. The reliability and validity of the scale were tested to be good, and the Cronbach coefficients of the total scale and four dimensions were 0.954, 0.872, 0.864, 0.892, and 0.912, respectively ( Zhang et al, 2021 ).…”

“…Therefore, how to improve doctors’ joy in work and reduce the negative effect on it has become an important focus of research. High levels of joy in work can diminish burnout, anxiety, depression, and other negative emotions among medical staff, as well as enhance motivation and initiative, thereby improving patient safety and quality of care ( Sikka et al, 2015 ; Resource and Perlo, 2017 ; Zhang et al, 2021 ).…”

Development and validation of knowledge assessment scales on sarcopenia and fall for Chinese community‐dwelling older adults

“…First, the dimension–dimension correlation coefficient and dimension–total score correlation coefficient were calculated, with a range of 0–0.8 and 0.3–1, respectively, showing a good internal relevance of the scales 26 . Second, confirmatory factor analysis was carried out by covariance matrices and the maximum likelihood estimation method.…”

“…First, the dimension-dimension correlation coefficient and dimension-total score correlation coefficient were calculated, with a range of 0-0.8 and 0.3-1, respectively, showing a good internal relevance of the scales. 26 Second, confirmatory factor analysis was carried out by covariance matrices and the maximum likelihood estimation method. The indicators used to evaluate model fit were as follows: χ 2 value / d.f., root mean square error of approximation, goodness-of-fit index, comparative fit index (CFI) and root of mean square residual (RMR).…”

A scale to measure the worry level in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy with sedation: Development, reliability, and validity

“…Validity: Correlation analysis and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were applied to evaluate the criterion validity and construct validity of the scale. Bartlett test of sphericity scores 〈0.05 and a KMO score of 〉 0.70 for the degree of sampling were considered suitable for factor analysis ( Zhang et al., 2021 ). Indices such as chi-square/degrees of freedom (CMIN/df), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI), and Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) were used to evaluate the model fit.…”