Skip to main content

Table 3 Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) results

From: Validating the use of the revised childbirth experience questionnaire in Hong Kong

Own capacity

 1

Labour and birth went as I had expected

0.6122

 2

I felt strong during labour and birth

0.5175

 4

I felt capable during labour and birth

0.5726

 5ab

I was tired during labour and birth

0.0849

 6

I felt happy during labour and birth

0.8089

 7

I felt that I handled the situation well

0.8918

 20abc

As a whole, how painful did you feel childbirth was?

-0.021

 21c

As a whole, how much control did you feel you had during childbirth?

0.4189

Variance

 

59.8%

General support

 10

Both my partner and I were treated with warmth and respect

0.7738

 11

Received the information I needed during labour and birth

0.8082

 16

My impression of the team’s medical skills made me feel secure

0.5131

 8ab

I wish the staff had listened to me more during labour and birth

0.0194

 9b

I took part in decisions regarding my care and treatment as much as I wanted

0.3498

Variance

 

22.7%

Perceived safety

 3ab

I felt scared during labour and birth

0.3575

 17b

I have many positive memories from childbirth

0.3864

 18a

I have many negative memories from childbirth

0.8586

 19a

Some of my memories from childbirth make me feel depressed

0.7857

 22bc

As a whole, how secure did you feel during childbirth?

0.2785

Variance

 

9.64%

Professional support

 12a

I would have preferred the midwife to be more present during labour and birth

0.6830

 13a

I would have preferred more encouragement from the midwife

0.8478

 14b

The midwife conveyed an atmosphere of calm

-0.2642

 15b

The midwife helped me to find my inner strength

-0.2342

Variance

 

7.8%

  1. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using maximum likelihood factoring with Promax rotation of factors. Point of inflexion of the curve was used to determine the number of factors used in the analysis
  2. aItems are reverse record. The score of all reversed items were reordered in the EFA so that all items measured in the same direction
  3. bItems were removed because the factor loading was <0.4
  4. cThe items were assessed with visual analogue scales. The items were transformed into a 4-point Likert scale