Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Oct 14;20(1):254.
doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01126-4.

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS) in a large and representative Swedish sample: is the use of the total scale and subscale scores justified?

Anna Helena Elisabeth Santesson  1 , Martin Bäckström  2 , Robert Holmberg  2 , Sean Perrin  2 , Håkan Jarbin  3
Affiliations

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS) in a large and representative Swedish sample: is the use of the total scale and subscale scores justified?

Anna Helena Elisabeth Santesson et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: There is a call for valid and reliable instruments to evaluate implementation of evidence-based practices (EBP). The 15-item Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS) measures attitude toward EBP, incorporating four lower-order factor subscales (Appeal, Requirements, Openness, and Divergence) and a Total scale (General Attitudes). It is one of a few measures of EBP attitudes evaluated for its psychometric properties. The reliability of the Total scale has been repeatedly supported, but also the multidimensionality of the inventory. However, whether all of the items contribute to the EBPAS Total beyond their subscales has yet to be demonstrated. In addition, the Divergence subscale has been questioned because of its low correlation with the other subscales and low inter-item correlations. The EBPAS is widely used to tailor and evaluate implementation efforts, but a Swedish version has not yet been validated. This study aimed to contribute to the development and cross-validation of the EBPAS by examining the factor structure of t a Swedish-language version in a large sample of mental health professionals.

Methods: The EBPAS was translated into Swedish and completed by 570 mental health professionals working in child and adolescent psychiatry settings spread across Sweden. The factor structure was examined using first-order, second-order and bifactor confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) models.

Results: Results suggested adequate fit for all CFA models. The EBPAS Total was strongly supported in the Swedish version. Support for the hierarchical second-order model was also strong, while the bifactor model gave mixed support for the subscales. The Openness and Requirements subscales came out best, while there were problems with both the Appeal (e.g. not different from the General Attitudes factor) and the Divergence subscales (e.g. low reliability).

Conclusions: Overall, the psychometric properties were on par with the English version and the total score appears to be a valid measure of general attitudes towards EBP. This is the first study supporting this General Attitudes factor based on a bifactor model. Although comparatively better supported in this Swedish sample, we conclude that the use of the EBPAS subscale scores may result in misleading conclusions. Practical implications and future directions are discussed.

Keywords: Attitudes; Bifactor model; Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA); EBP; Evidence-based practice attitude scale (EBPAS); Implementation; Psychometric evaluation; Psychometric properties; Validation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Second-Order Confirmatory factor analysis model. Standardized factor loadings for model 2b, n = 565, χ2 (86) =558.5, CFI = .973, RMSEA = .098, SRMR = 0.006. Estimation of residuals between Appeal subscale items is indicated by a double-headed arrow. All factor loadings are significant at the p < .001 level
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Bifactor Model Standardized factor loadings for model 3, n = 565, χ2 (75) =450.5, CFI = .978, RMSEA = .094, SRMR = 0.058. Estimation of residuals between Appeal subscale items is indicated by a double-headed arrow. All factor loadings are significant at the p < .001 level
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Aarons GA. Mental health provider attitudes toward adoption of evidence-based practice: the evidence-based practice attitude scale (EBPAS) Ment Health Serv Res. 2004;6(2):61–74. doi: 10.1023/B:MHSR.0000024351.12294.65. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991;50(2):179–211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T. - DOI
    1. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84(2):191–215. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rogers E. Diffusion of innovation. New York: Free Press; 1995.
    1. Swann WB, Jr, Chang-Schneider C, Larsen McClarty K. Do people's self-views matter? Self-concept and self-esteem in everyday life. Am Psychol. 2007;62(2):84. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.62.2.84. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources