Psychometric evaluation of a new instrument in Spanish to measure the wellness of university nursing faculty

References

• Gil-Monte PR. La Batería UNIPSICO: propiedades psicométricas de las escalas que evalúan los factores psicosociales de demanda. Arch Prev Riesgos Labor. 2016;19:86–94.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moreno B. Factores y riesgos laborales psicosociales: conceptualización, historia y cambios actuales. Med Segur Trab. 2011;57:4–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.4321/S0465-546X2011000500002. Accessed September 10, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Caicoya M. Dilemas en la evaluación de riesgos psicosociales. Arch Prev Riesgos Labor. 2004;7:109–118.
   Google Scholar
• Castejón E. Evaluación de riesgos. In: Benavides FG, ed. Salud laboral: conceptos y técnicas para la prevención de riesgos laborales. Barcelona, Spain: Elsevier Masson; 2007:223–234.
   Google Scholar
• Moncada S, Llorens C. Factores psicosociales. In: Ruiz C, García AM, Delclos J, Benavides FG, eds. Salud Laboral. Conceptos y técnicas para la prevención de riesgos laborales. Barcelona, Spain: Elsevier Masson; 2007:397–405.
   Google Scholar
• Smith BJ, Tang KC, Nutbeam D. WHO health promotion glossary: new terms. Health Promot Int. 2006;21:340–345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Expert forecast on emerging psychosocial risks related to occupational safety and Health. https://osha.europa.eu/en/tools-and-publications/publications/reports/7807118. Accessed July 9, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Stress at work-facts and figures. https://osha.europa.eu/en/node/6862/file_view. Accessed November 20, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Priorities for occupational safety and health research in Europe: 2013–2020. https://osha.europa.eu/es/tools-and-publications/publications/reports/priorities-for-occupational-safety-and-health-research-in-europe-2013-2020. Accessed March 9, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Law 31/1995 of November 8, Prevention of Risks Labor. Official Bulletin of the State, n°. 269, (10-11-1995).
   Google Scholar
• Almodóvar A, Galiana ML, Hervás P. VII Encuesta Nacional de Condiciones de Trabajo. Madrid: Instituto Nacional de Seguridad e Higiene en el Trabajo; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Moncada S, Utzet M, Molinero E, et al. The Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire II (COPSOQ II) in Spain—a tool for psychosocial risk assessment at the workplace. Am Journal Ind Med. 2014;57:97–107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabadà I. Identificación de los factores de riesgo laboral en docentes: un estudio Delphi. Arch Prev Riesgos Labor. 2002;5:53–61.
   Google Scholar
• Artazcoz L, Molinero E. Evaluación de los factores de riesgo psicosocial combinando metodología cuantitativa y cualitativa. Arch Prev Riesgos Labor. 2004;7:13–1-42.
   Google Scholar
• Montgomery C, Rupp A. A meta-analysis for exploring the diverse causes and effects of stress in teachers. Can Educ. 2005;28:458–486.
   Google Scholar
• Galdeano H, Godoy P, Cruz I. Factores de riesgo psicosocial en profesores de educación secundaria. Arch Prev Riesgos Labor. 2007;10:174–180.
   Google Scholar
• Esteras J, Chorot P, Sandín B. Predicción del Burnout en los docentes: papel de los factores organizacionales, personales y sociodemográficos. Psicopatología y psicolo clín. 2014;19:79–92.
   Google Scholar
• Rojas MJ, Rodríguez JB. Factores de riesgo psicosociales en el profesorado de Enfermería Geriátrica de universidades españolas (1a parte). Gerokomos. 2010;21:158–166.
   Google Scholar
• Rojas MJ, Rodríguez JB. Factores de riesgo psicosociales en el profesorado de Enfermería Geriátrica de universidades españolas (2a parte). Gerokomos. 2011;22:62–71.
   Google Scholar
• Moncada S, Llorens C, Font A, Galtés A, Navarro A. Exposición laboral a riesgos psicosociales en población asalariada en España (2004-05): valores de referencia del cuestionario COPSOQ ISTAS21. Rev Esp Salud Pública. 2008;82:667–675.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waltz CF, Strickland OL, Lenz ER. Measurement in Nursing and Health Research. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Gil J. La metodología de investigación mediante grupos de discusión. Enseñanza & Teaching: Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica Salamanca. http://rca.usal.es/~revistas_trabajo/index.php/0212-5374/article/view/4179. Published November 10, 2009. Accessed May 17, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res. 1986;35:382–385.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falcó-Pegueroles A, Lluch-Canut MT, Guàrdia-Olmos J. Development process and initial validation of the Ethical Conflict in Nursing Questionnaire-Critical Care Version. BMC Med Ethics. 2013;14:1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 5th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• López MPS, Dresch V. The 12-Item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): reliability, external validity and factor structure in the Spanish population. Psicothema. 2008;20:839–843.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartlett MS. Tests of significance in factor analysis. Br J Stat Psychol. 1950:3;77–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974:39;31–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. PARE. 2005;10. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.110.9154. Published November 8, 2005. Accessed February 8, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Clark LA, Watson D. Constructing validity basic issues in objective scale development. Psychol Asses.1995;7:309–319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fayers PM, Machin D. Quality of Life: Assessment, Analysis and Interpretation. London, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Hutcheson GD, Sofroniou N. The Multivariate Social Scientist: Introductory Statistics Using Generalized Linear Models. London, UK: Sage Publications; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Martínez-González MA, Sánchez-Villegas A, Faulín FJ. Bioestadística amigable. 2nd ed. Madrid, Spain: Díaz de Santos; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. The Theory of Measurement Error. Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Cronbach's alpha. BMJ. 1997;314:572.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaju A, Crask MR. The perfect design: Optimization between reliability, validity, redundancy in scale items and response rates. Am Market Assoc. 1999;10:127–131.
   Google Scholar
• DeVellis RF. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales. A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16:297–334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar