Psychometric testing of the consequences of an HIV disclosure instrument in Mandarin: a cross-sectional study of persons living with HIV in Hunan, China

Figures & data

Table 1 Sociodemographic profile of the study participants

Variables	n (%)	Total CoHD scores and scores for the CoHD subscales
		Rewards (mean ± SD)	Costs (mean ± SD)	Total (mean ± SD)
Ethnicity
Han	181 (98.4)	24.9±8.53	27.0±6.35	51.9±9.36
Others	3 (1.6)	29.0±16.70	25.7±3.79	54.7±16.04
Place of residence
Rural area	63 (34.2)	24.3±7.55	26.6±5.93	50.9±8.46
Others	121 (65.8)	25.3±9.18	27.2±6.51	52.5±9.91
Gender
Female	51 (27.7)	25.3±8.75	25.9±7.21	51.3±9.96
Male	133 (72.3)	24.9±8.64	27.4±5.91	52.3±9.26
Education
Less than middle school	22 (12.0)	21.9±7.20	29.6±4.82	51.5±7.10
Middle school	92 (50.0)	25.2±8.75	27.0±6.26	52.2±9.43
High school	43 (23.4)	25.1±8.14	26.2±6.99	51.3±10.19
Technical training	21 (11.4)	25.2±10.01	26.4±6.46	51.7±10.62
College	6 (3.3)	30.7±9.40	26.3±5.68	57.0±8.58
Marital status
Never married	44 (23.9)	29.3±10.30*	24.7±7.28*	54.0±10.41*
Married	75 (40.8)	24.9±8.27	27.5±5.63	52.3±9.73
Separated	4 (2.2)	21.3±5.25	25.3±5.85	46.5±10.91
Divorced	45 (24.5)	23.4±5.86	28.8±5.75	52.1±6.78
Widowed	16 (8.7)	19.2±7.91	26.7±6.81	45.9±9.60
Employed
Yes	42 (22.8)	23.9±8.51	27.7±5.71	51.6±9.17
No	142 (77.2)	25.3±8.69	26.8±6.48	52.1±9.55
Monthly income (Yuan)
No income	51 (27.7)	23.4±9.04	26.5±6.33	49.9±9.17#
500 or below	65 (35.3)	26.3±8.09	26.9±6.47	53.1±9.36
501–1,000	5 (2.7)	18.0±5.96	27.0±5.00	45.0±9.87
1,001–1,500	13 (7.1)	22.0±7.99	26.2±7.30	48.2±9.34
1,501–2,000	21 (11.4)	27.1±10.36	29.7±7.05	56.8±8.79
2,001–2,500	7 (3.8)	29.7±9.38	24.1±5.82	53.9±12.40
2,501–3,000	9 (4.9)	27.2±6.55	27.8±4.82	55.0±8.05
3,001 or above	13 (7.1)	22.9±6.73	27.2±4.49	50.1±9.44

Notes:

* Marital status was related to the scores for costs, rewards, and the total CoHD scale.

# Monthly income was related to the scores for the total CoHD scale.

Abbreviation: CoHD, Consequences of HIV Disclosure.

Table 2 Items analysis of the Mandarin CoHD

Items	CV (<25%)	P for CR (≥0.05)	Correlation of item-total (<0.3)	Correlation between item with another subscale (>0.4)
1*	0.45	0.00	0.36	−0.03
2	0.56	0.00	0.43	−0.23
3*	0.31	0.03	0.20a	−0.19
4	0.54	0.00	0.32	−0.15
5	0.52	0.00	0.54	−0.20
6	0.62	0.00	0.49	−0.19
7*	0.51	0.00	0.30a	−0.08
8*	0.49	0.00	0.42	−0.04
9*	0.44	0.00	0.42	−0.60b
10	0.34	0.00	0.35	−0.16
11	0.44	0.00	0.52	−0.05
12	0.56	0.00	0.57	−0.14
13*	0.43	0.00	0.49	−0.02
14*	0.44	0.00	0.53	0.01
15*	0.25	0.01	0.22a	−0.14
16	0.61	0.00	0.58	−0.16
17	0.59	0.00	0.61	−0.12
18	0.61	0.00	0.63	−0.15

Notes:

* The items belong to the costs consequences.

a The correlation of item-total <0.3.

b The correlation between one item and another subscale >0.4.

Abbreviations: CoHD, Consequences of HIV Disclosure; CV, coefficient of variation; CR, critical ratio.

Figure 1 Scree plot.

Table 3 Factor loading of each item

Items	Component
	Factor 1 (rewards)	Factor 2 (costs)
18	0.83	−0.07
16	0.80	−0.08
17	0.79	−0.04
5	0.72	−0.10
12	0.70	−0.05
6	0.69	−0.08
2	0.61	−0.17
11	0.54	0.03
10	0.45	−0.11
4	0.43	−0.15
14	0.02	0.85
13	0.00	0.83
8	−0.02	0.69
9	−0.02	0.67
1	−0.04	0.56
15	−0.15	0.54
3	−0.23	0.54
7	−0.07	0.50

Table 4 Scores of each item of the Mandarin CoHD*

Costs	Mean±SD	Rewards	Mean±SD
Thinking we would fight if I told the person	4.28±1.08	Thinking I wanted the person to be safe from HIV infection	3.83±1.30
Thinking the person would lecture me	3.95±1.22	Thinking the person had a right to know	3.29±1.44
Thinking I might lose the relationship with the person	3.27±1.40	Thinking the person would be understanding	2.77±1.43
Thinking the person would have to be concerned about me	3.22±1.41	Thinking I would get emotional support from the person	2.61±1.46
Thinking the person would blame me	3.17±1.42	Thinking the person needed to be prepared to assist me	2.46±1.39
Thinking the person would not want to be around me	3.16±1.54	Thinking I could count on the person	2.24±1.40
Thinking the relationship with the person would get bad	3.15±1.38	Thinking that telling the person would make our relationship better	2.02±1.24
Thinking the person would be burdened by the information	2.79±1.42	Thinking we would feel more connected	2.01±1.19
		Thinking telling the person would bring us closer together	1.96±1.19
		Thinking I could blow off steam to the person	1.78±0.97

Note:

* Costs and rewards items were obtained from Serovich and Serovich et al.^22,23

Abbreviation: CoHD, Consequences of HIV Disclosure.

SerovichJMA test of two HIV disclosure theoriesAIDS Educ Prev200113435536411565594

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

SerovichJMLimJYMasonTLA retest of two HIV disclosure theories: the women’s storyHealth Soc Work2008331233118326447

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar