Back

Translation and psychometric validation of the Mental Illness: Clinicians Attitudes Scale (MICA-4) to assess attitudes of primary care physicians in Pakistan

Muneeb, N. u. A.; Nisa, A.; Humayun, A.

2026-03-20 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.64898/2026.03.14.26347350 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background Negative and stigmatizing attitudes towards people suffering from mental disorders among healthcare providers often act as a barrier to mental healthcare access. To assess these attitudes in primary care physicians (PCPs), a robust, culturally tailored psychometric tool is crucial. This study aimed to translate and psychometrically validate the MICA-4 to assess negative attitudes among PCPs in Pakistan. Methods We recruited two independent samples of PCPs (n=191, n=329) using non-probability sampling. Three bilingual mental health professionals forward-translated the scale, which was then independently reviewed and back-translated. Cognitive interviews were conducted (n=15 PCPs) to assess comprehension and clarity, for the final version to be used in the study. EFA was conducted on Sample 1 to examine the underlying factor structure of the Urdu MICA-4 items. CFA was then performed on Sample 2 to cross-validate the factor structure identified in Sample 1. Internal consistency and convergent validity were also assessed. Results A three-factor solution was retained, including Views (seven items), reflecting clinicians general evaluative perspectives toward mental illness and professional roles; Stereotypes (five items) representing generalized beliefs and disclosure-related concerns regarding individuals with mental illness, and Stigma (three items) capturing social distancing and perceived threat-related attitudes. The Comparative Fit (CFI = .958) and the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI = .946) indicated good fit. Three items (9, 13, and 12) were removed due to weak loadings (< .40). Composite reliability ({omega}) indicated adequate internal consistency for the Views ({omega} = .70) and Stereotypes ({omega} = .74) factors, and lower for stigma ({omega} {approx} .53). Convergent validity was modest (.40 to .44). Conclusion The findings support the cautious use of Urdu MICA-4 in Pakistani primary care settings. The variability in the factor structure of the scale across cultures raises a practical implication for its dissemination. When item-level instability repeatedly emerges across contexts, permitting limited, evidence-based refinement may strengthen measurement stability and comparability, as well as its reliability in diverse healthcare settings.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.