Skip to contents Skip to Global Navigation Menu
  • KDCA
  • Contact us
  • E-Submission

PHRP : Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives

OPEN ACCESS. pISSN: 2210-9099. eISSN: 2233-6052
Search
Advanced Search

Articles

Page Path

Original Article

A confirmatory analysis of the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions questionnaire for community-based surveillance of infectious diseases: a cross-sectional study in Malaysia

Ahmed Azeez Hasan1orcid, Anis Kausar Ghazali1orcid, Najib Majdi Yaacob1orcid, Norsa’adah Bachok1orcid, Suhaily Mohd Hairon2orcid, Nur Amira M. Nadir3orcid, Fatimah Muhd Shukri4orcid
Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives 2025;16(5):508-518.
Published online: August 12, 2025

1Biostatistics and Research Methodology Unit, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia Health Campus, Kelantan, Malaysia

2Department of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia Health Campus, Kelantan, Malaysia

3Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia

4Department of Film Studies, Culture Heritage and National Cinema, Faculty of Creative Technology and Heritage, Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Kelantan, Malaysia

Corresponding author: Anis Kausar Ghazali Biostatistics and Research Methodology Unit, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia Health Campus, 16150 Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia. E-mail: anisyo@usm.my
• Received: April 5, 2025   • Revised: June 15, 2025   • Accepted: July 15, 2025

© 2025 Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

  • 1,778 Views
  • 82 Download
prev next

Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF
  • Objectives
    This study aimed to validate the psychometric properties of the recently developed knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions questionnaire for community-based surveillance of infectious diseases (KAP-CBS-ID questionnaire), using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT).
  • Methods
    A cross-sectional study using multistage sampling recruited 470 schoolteachers from Kelantan, Malaysia. The self-administered KAP-CBS-ID questionnaire consists of 3 domains: knowledge (31 items), attitudes (23 items), and perceptions (21-items). Two-parameter logistic (2-PL) IRT analysis and CFA were performed to validate the knowledge section. For attitudes and perceptions sections, CFA proceeded using a 4-factor model to evaluate both model fit and construct validity.
  • Results
    Two-PL IRT analysis of the knowledge section resulted in elimination of 14 items due to inadequate discrimination or difficulty parameters. The 3-factor CFA model demonstrated good fit indices for knowledge (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA], 0.028; comparative fit index [CFI], 0.945; Tucker-Lewis index [TLI], 0.941) without any modifications. The attitudes section required re-specification, ultimately yielding 21 items across 4 factors with acceptable fit indices (standardized root mean square residual [SRMR], 0.067; RMSEA, 0.055; CFI, 0.937; TLI, 0.927). Similarly, the perceptions section was refined to 17 items across 4 factors, showing good model fit (SRMR, 0.055; RMSEA, 0.059; CFI, 0.962; TLI, 0.954). Factor loadings ranged from 0.33 to 0.98, while Raykov’s rho reliability estimates ranged from 0.71 to 0.93. Factor determinacy exceeded 80% for all factors.
  • Conclusion
    The KAP-CBS-ID is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing community representatives’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding community-based surveillance of infectious diseases.
  • Keywords: Communicable diseases; Community-based surveillance; Factor analysis, statistical; Psychometrics; Surveys and questionnaires; Validation
Infectious disease outbreaks and epidemics typically begin within the community. Community members are often the first to observe changes in health patterns and identify health threats, yet delays in transmitting this information to health authorities can hinder timely interventions [1,2]. Community-based surveillance (CBS) leverages the capabilities of community members to perform surveillance activities within their own communities, thereby enhancing the early detection and response to disease outbreaks [3]. The World Health Organization defines CBS as the systematic detection and reporting of public health events or cases of specific diseases by community members to health authorities [4]. This approach can substantially expedite the detection and response to outbreaks [5–11].
Multiple studies have shown that CBS can facilitate more timely responses and improved containment of disease outbreaks [1,9,10,12]. However, evidence supporting the overall effectiveness of CBS remains limited [13]. Documented cases have shown that community health workers can effectively implement CBS programs, even in challenging contexts such as conflict zones [10,13–15] or during natural disasters [16,17]. The International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (IFRC) maintains a network of more than 15 million volunteers worldwide who are deeply embedded in their local communities [18]. These volunteers, who possess linguistic and cultural familiarity and are physically present within their communities, represent a critical resource for implementing preparedness activities, including CBS, in remote regions with limited access to health services [9,13]. This highlights the vital role of community members in the early identification and reporting of health threats.
Malaysia has implemented event-based surveillance, defined as the organized and rapid collection of information regarding events that may pose risks or concerns to public health. These events, which arise within the community, may have actual, suspected, or potential impacts on human health, thereby generating concern, fear, or alarm [19]. Information about such events may be collected from rumors or other ad hoc reports via both formal channels (such as routine reporting systems) and informal sources (including non-governmental organizations, community members, and social media).
However, as noted in the 2018 Event-Based Surveillance Protocol [19], the flow of information from the community to health authorities remains slow. An administrative directive from the Deputy Director-General of Health (Public Health) issued in January 2014 highlighted that these events were often reported in the media well before they reached Ministry of Health officials. This delay can be attributed to a lack of community awareness regarding the CBS process. Although the community is recognized as the primary source of initial signals in the CBS system, the Event-Based Surveillance Protocol [19] also notes a lack of empirical studies evaluating community members’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions concerning this crucial surveillance mechanism.
Therefore, this study aims to confirm the structure of the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions questionnaire for community-based surveillance of infectious diseases (KAP-CBS-ID questionnaire) [20] to assess these constructs among Malaysian community representatives. The selection of community representatives, rather than the general community, was intended to increase the signal-to-noise ratio‎ and provide adequate specificity, ensuring that reporting does not overwhelm the surveillance system [21].
Study Design and Setting
This study employed a cross-sectional design and was conducted among Malaysian community representatives residing in Kelantan from March 2024 to June 2024. It constitutes the third stage of a larger research project. The first stage involved the development and translation of the questionnaire [20], while the second stage focused on item response theory (IRT) analysis for the knowledge domain and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) for the attitudes and perception domains.
Setting
The study was conducted in primary and secondary schools across the state of Kelantan, Malaysia. Four districts—Kota Bharu, Bachok, Pasir Puteh, and Kuala Krai—were selected, with schools within each district chosen randomly. The KAP-CBS-ID questionnaire comprises 3 main sections: knowledge, developed based on a comprehensive literature review; attitudes, constructed using the theory of reasoned action (TRA); and perceptions, grounded in the health belief model (HBM). The questionnaire underwent thorough EFA in a previous phase, utilizing principal component analysis with varimax rotation to identify the underlying factor structure. This process revealed distinct factors within each domain, which were then confirmed in the current confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) study. Each scale underwent a rigorous validation process, including content validation by 11 experts, face validation, and a pilot study involving 30 participants, followed by EFA. The knowledge section used a dichotomous response format, whereas the attitudes and perceptions sections were rated on 5-point Likert scales. The questionnaire’s structure is as follows: the knowledge section contains 3 subdomains—knowledge of infectious diseases (18 items), knowledge of CBS of infectious diseases (3 items), and community-level case definition (10 items)—with responses of “yes,” “no,” and “I don’t know.” The attitudes section comprises 4 subdomains: negative attitudes (6 items), subjective norms (4 items), intention to participate in CBS (6 items), and behavioral likelihood to engage in CBS (7 items), each rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “1-strongly disagree” to “5-strongly agree” or “1-never” to “5-always,” depending on the item. The perceptions section also includes 4 subdomains: perceived susceptibility (5 items), perceived benefit (5 items), perceived barriers (3 items), and self-efficacy (4 items), rated on 5-point Likert scales from “1-never true” to “5-always true” and from “1-extremely unlikely” to “5-extremely likely,” as appropriate [20]. Data collection commenced in May 2024 and concluded in June 2024, utilizing the KAP-CBS-ID questionnaire.
Participants
A total of 470 community representatives, including teachers from both public and Islamic schools, were recruited using a multistage sampling method. After obtaining informed consent, participants completed the self-administered questionnaires during school break times. To be eligible for inclusion, participants had to be at least 18 years old and proficient in both written and spoken Malay. Participants were encouraged to provide honest responses, and the estimated time to complete the questionnaire was approximately 20 to 25 minutes.
Bias
The researchers implemented several measures to minimize bias in the validation study of the KAP-CBS-ID questionnaire. The use of a multistage sampling technique ensured representative participation across varied geographic and demographic settings within Kelantan. Selection bias was reduced by applying clear inclusion criteria for schoolteachers. Comprehensive psychometric analyses, including 2-parameter logistic (2-PL) IRT and CFA, enabled the removal of items with poor performance. The self-administered questionnaire featured a balance of positively and negatively worded statements, and assurances of anonymity and confidentiality were provided to all participants. To further reduce cultural and linguistic biases, the questionnaire underwent a thorough translation and back-translation process with local experts, ensuring its suitability for the Malaysian context.
Study Size
Sample size determination for the CFA was performed using 2 approaches. First, the “rule of thumb” ratio of 5 participants per questionnaire item (N:P=5:1) was applied, indicating a need for 375 participants for the 75-item questionnaire. This calculation incorporated a 20% anticipated dropout rate. Second, Arifin’s web-based sample size calculator (2017) estimated a requirement of 463 participants [22]. Based on these calculations, a sample size of 470 participants was deemed adequate.
The sampling process comprised 3 stages. Initially, 4 districts in Kelantan were purposively selected: Kota Bharu and Bachok (urban), and Pasir Puteh and Kuala Krai (rural). While the rural-urban distinction was not directly analyzed in this validation study, it is considered relevant for future research, as some evidence suggests that CBS may be more effective in rural than in urban settings [3]. In the second stage, schools within each district were randomly selected. In the final stage, participants within each school were approached conveniently during their free periods. An overview of the study was provided, and verbal consent was obtained, with the process facilitated by a Malay-speaking research assistant.
Statistical Methods
To minimize data entry errors, all questionnaire items were compiled into a Google Form (Google LLC). Responses from the paper-based questionnaires were then manually entered into this Google Form. Subsequently, all responses were exported as an Excel spreadsheet for data cleaning and further analysis. After data cleaning and numerical coding, the dataset was transferred to RStudio ver. 4.4.1 (RStudio), for CFA and 2-PL IRT analysis.

Item response theory

The knowledge section of the questionnaire was analyzed using IRT due to its dichotomous response format. Specifically, a 2-PL IRT model was implemented using the ltm package, version 1.2-0. The 2-PL IRT model estimates 2 parameters for each item: difficulty (b) and discrimination (a). The difficulty parameter represents the ability level at which an individual has a 50% probability of answering the item correctly, with acceptable values typically ranging from –3 to +3. The discrimination parameter indicates how well an item distinguishes between individuals with varying ability levels; values above 0.25 are considered acceptable, and values above 1.0 are regarded as good. Unidimensionality was assessed using the modified parallel analysis method to ensure that items measured a single underlying construct. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to evaluate the internal consistency reliability of the knowledge domain, with values above 0.7 considered acceptable. Items with low discrimination (a<0.25) or extreme difficulty (|b|>3) were considered for revision.

Confirmatory factor analysis

CFA was conducted following the exploratory study to verify the factor structure of the questionnaire. The CFA utilized the lavaan package ver. 0.6–18 [23]. Model fit was evaluated using a range of indices: absolute fit indices, including chi-square (χ2) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR); parsimony-adjusted indices, such as the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA); and comparative fit indices, including the comparative fit index (CFI) and the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) [24].
Thresholds for model fit indices in this study were set as follows: a p-value for χ2 greater than 0.05, RMSEA and SRMR less than or equal to 0.08, and CFI and TLI greater than or equal to 0.92, based on the model structure and sample size considerations [25]. Composite reliability (CR) was assessed using the semTools package ver. 0.5–6, within RStudio, with reliability indicated by Raykov’s rho [24,26]. A Raykov’s rho value exceeding 0.7 was considered acceptable for reliability [27]. Factor determinacy, representing the precision with which factor scores can be estimated from observed items, was evaluated, with values above 0.80 considered good. Average variance extracted (AVE), measuring the amount of variance captured by a construct relative to measurement error, was deemed acceptable at values above 0.50. CR, another measure of internal consistency, was also considered adequate if it was above 0.70.
For the knowledge section, CFA was conducted after IRT analysis. The combined use of IRT and CFA is generally recommended, as this approach enhances the quality of scale measurement and results in more robust assessments in applied research settings [28]. Due to the categorical nature of responses, the weighted root mean square residual (WRMR) was used in place of SRMR.
Ethics Statement
Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of Universiti Sains Malaysia (ref. no: USM/JEPeM/22050317). All participants were provided with information about the study, and informed consent was obtained from those who agreed to participate.
Descriptive Data
As shown in Table 1, a total of 470 community representatives participated in this study. The demographic data show that the sample was predominantly female (75.3%) and Malay (99.4%), with a mean age of 43.3 years (standard deviation, 9.5). Most participants were married (79.4%) and employed as government servants (85.5%), while 87.2% held university degrees or higher qualifications. The majority worked as public schoolteachers (87.7%), resided in urban areas (64.0%), and reported having received information about infectious diseases (93.8%).
Figure 1 illustrates the sources from which community representatives most frequently obtained information. The internet was the most widely used source, with 85% of respondents reporting that they obtain information about infectious diseases online. In contrast, the animal health sector was the least utilized, with only 5% receiving information from this source.
Main Results

Knowledge section

The 2-PL IRT analysis indicated that the difficulty and discrimination parameters were generally acceptable for most items in the knowledge domain. This section includes 3 subdomains: information on infectious diseases (18 items), knowledge of CBS of infectious diseases (3 items), and community-level case definitions (10 items). Although a few items exhibited poor model fit, as indicated by a significant chi-square p-value, they were retained because their difficulty and discrimination parameters remained within acceptable ranges, as shown in Table 2. The proportion of information explained by the knowledge items was 93.57%, 89.35%, and 98.31% for the 3 subdomains, respectively. Both the knowledge of CBS and community-level case definitions subdomains met the unidimensionality assumption (p=0.53 and p=0.81, respectively). The internal consistency of the knowledge section was acceptable, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.71 in IRT analysis.
Following the 2-PL IRT analysis, CFA was performed using the weighted least squares mean and variance adjusted (WLSMV) estimator to confirm the 3-factor structure of the knowledge section. The model demonstrated a good fit, with fit indices as follows: CFI=0.945, TLI=0.941, WRMR=1.301, RMSEA=0.028 (90% CI, 0.022–0.033), and an RMSEA p-value>0.950.

Attitudes section

CFA was conducted on the attitudes section. Since multivariate normality was not achieved, the robust maximum likelihood estimator was employed. The initial CFA model did not meet criteria for adequate fit, with a CFI of 0.874 and TLI of 0.858. However, SRMR and RMSEA values were within acceptable thresholds at 0.073 and 0.072 (0.066–0.079), respectively. To enhance model fit, item Q48 was removed due to a low factor loading (0.14), followed by the exclusion of item Q47, which had a high standardized residual (5.157). An error correlation was also added between items Q45 and Q46. These modifications were carried out iteratively in consultation with research team experts. As a result, model fit indices improved, as detailed in Table 3.
The final model for attitudes comprised 21 items, organized into 4 distinct factors in alignment with the TRA: behavioral likelihood to be involved in CBS (7 items), subjective norms (4 items), intention to engage in CBS (6 items), and negative attitudes toward CBS (6 items). The CR coefficients (Raykov’s rho) for these factors were 0.860, 0.895, 0.714, and 0.546, respectively. Although the fourth factor’s reliability was relatively low, its factor determinacy value above 0.80 indicates good internal consistency reliability, as suggested by Wang and Wang [29].
Table 4 presents the initial and final CFA models for the attitude factors, including factor loadings, AVE, CR, and factor determinacy for all final model factors.

Perceptions section

Initial CFA of the perceptions section, structured into 4 factors, did not produce satisfactory model fit. To improve the model, problematic items (Q55, Q66, Q69, and Q70) were removed based on both fit indices and theoretical rationale. Additional error correlations were introduced between items Q56 and Q57, as well as Q61 and Q62. Improved model fit indices are summarized in Table 5.
The 4 factors in this section align with the HBM framework: perceived susceptibility (5 items), perceived benefit (5 items), perceived barriers (3 items), and self-efficacy (4 items). Each factor exhibited strong internal consistency reliability, with CR values of 0.816, 0.904, 0.808, and 0.820, respectively.
Studies evaluating CBS programs have traditionally focused on metrics such as reporting completeness, report frequency, and related indicators, primarily emphasizing healthcare workers and health facilities [7,30–32]. Although comprehensive tools exist to assess the need for CBS, such as the Community-Based Surveillance Assessment Tool by IFRC [33], these instruments do not specifically target community awareness, attitudes, or perceptions toward CBS. To address this gap, we developed and validated a new questionnaire and used CFA to provide robust evidence for the validity of its factor structure [34]. This study presents the psychometric properties and model fit of the newly developed instrument using CFA.
The 3 domains of the KAP-CBS-ID questionnaire (knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions) were analyzed separately to evaluate their respective psychometric properties and factor structures. This approach ensures that each domain preserves its theoretical integrity while improving the overall construct validity of CBS assessment. Such a design is especially useful for targeted interventions, allowing for the independent assessment of specific components of knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions as needed.
The cut-off values for model fit indices used in this study were guided by the recommendations of Hair [35]. For questionnaires with more than 30 items and sample sizes exceeding 300, the suggested thresholds are: CFI and TLI above 0.92, SRMR no greater than 0.08 when CFI exceeds 0.92, and RMSEA below 0.07 if CFI is at least 0.92. These criteria ensure an adequate model fit for large-scale instruments. The fit indices observed in our models met these cut-off values. Several studies from Malaysia further support the use of these indices as standard benchmarks [36–38], with some reporting slightly lower values than those obtained in our study.
The IRT analysis of the knowledge section led to the removal of 14 items due to inadequate discrimination or difficulty, mirroring the process described by Hung et al. [39]. This refinement resulted in 31 items in the knowledge section, which were subsequently confirmed through CFA [40]. The 3-factor CFA model for the knowledge section demonstrated a good fit without requiring modification. The WLSMV estimator was employed due to the categorical nature of the data. As SRMR is not appropriate for categorical responses, the WRMR was used, where lower values indicate better fit, with a cut-off of 1.0 generally considered acceptable [41]. Although the WRMR value in our study did not reach the ideal threshold, prior research, such as Shuan [42], suggests that a less-than-ideal WRMR is not problematic when other fit indices confirm model adequacy.
The CFA for the attitudes section initially produced unsatisfactory fit indices. The re-specification process involved iterative adjustments to improve fit (Table 4). The initial model (model 0) exhibited suboptimal indices (CFI, 0.874; TLI, 0.858; RMSEA, 0.072; SRMR, 0.073). Modifications included sequential removal of items with low factor loadings (such as Q48 and Q47) and the addition of residual correlations between selected item pairs, such as Q45 and Q46 (modification index [MI], 159.4), based on factor loadings and modification indices. These changes resulted in a final re-specified model with a CFI of 0.962, TLI of 0.954, SRMR of 0.055, and RMSEA of 0.059 (90% confidence interval, 0.047–0.070; p=0.111), consistent with guidelines from Hair et al. [25], as summarized by Newsom [43], who recommend CFI and TLI>0.90, RMSEA<0.08, and SRMR<0.08 as thresholds for adequate fit.
The CFA for the perceptions domain also revealed initial model misfit, prompting a sequential re-specification process to improve fit (Table 6). The original model yielded fit indices of CFI=0.850, TLI=0.827, SRMR=0.091, and RMSEA=0.094. Although these indices were not ideal, similar studies have deemed such values acceptable [26]. Incremental improvements were achieved by removing items with low factor loadings (Q70RF3, Q66RF3, Q69RF3, and Q55RF3), with a significant improvement following the removal of Q55RF3 (CFI, 0.905; TLI, 0.886; SRMR, 0.065; RMSEA, 0.069). Further enhancement was accomplished by adding error correlations between Q56 and Q57, as well as Q61 and Q62. The final model (model 6) exhibited a CFI of 0.962, TLI of 0.954, SRMR of 0.055, and RMSEA of 0.059, indicating satisfactory fit. The justification for correlated errors was based on item similarity, with such method effects often arising from similarly or reversely worded items [34]. All factor loadings in the questionnaire exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.3 [25], with observed values ranging from 0.33 to 0.98. Internal consistency reliability across domains was satisfactory, with Raykov’s rho values ranging from 0.71 to 0.93. The exception was the negative attitudes domain, which fell below the recommended threshold. However, because of its conceptual importance, determinacy—a supplementary measure of internal consistency—was evaluated and surpassed the recommended value of 0.80, indicating adequate reliability [29].
This study has a few limitations. First, the focus on schoolteachers as community representatives resulted in a relatively homogeneous and accessible sample; future validation should incorporate a broader range of community leaders, such as religious figures, local government officials, community health volunteers, and traditional healers, to enhance the tool’s applicability. Second, the sample was predominantly Malay, limiting generalizability across other ethnic groups. Third, the sample size calculations did not account for the cluster effect inherent in the multistage sampling design, which could affect the precision of the estimates. Future research should address these limitations by including more racially diverse and heterogeneous samples.
The KAP-CBS-ID questionnaire demonstrated strong validity, reliability, and psychometric properties for assessing the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of Malaysian community leaders regarding CBS of infectious diseases. The finalized model consists of 69 items, with 31 assessing knowledge, 21 evaluating attitudes, and 17 measuring perceptions. Given the relative homogeneity of the current sample, further validation is recommended to ensure generalizability to broader target groups and individuals with different racial backgrounds.
• A psychometrically valid questionnaire on knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding community-based surveillance of infectious diseases was previously developed.
• Item response theory and confirmatory factor analysis validated the 3-domain questionnaire among 470 schoolteachers in Malaysia.
• The final questionnaire retained 17 knowledge items, 21 attitude items, and 17 perception items that exhibited high reliability.
• This validated tool can effectively assess community leaders' preparedness for infectious disease surveillance.

Ethics Approval

This study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Universiti Sains Malaysia (ref. no: USM/JEPeM/22050317) and performed in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained for publication of this study and accompanying images.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Funding

None.

Availability of Data

The datasets are not publicly available but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Authors’ Contributions

Conceptualization: all authors; Data curation: AAH, NAMN, FS; Formal analysis: AAH, AKG; Methodology: AAH, AKG; Supervision: AKG, NMY, NSB, SMH; Validation: AAH, AKG, NMY, NSB; Writing–original draft: AAH, NAMN, FS; Writing–review & editing: all authors. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Figure 1.
Primary sources of information on infectious diseases.
Figure 1. Primary sources of information on infectious diseases.  
A confirmatory analysis of the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions questionnaire for community-based surveillance of infectious diseases: a cross-sectional study in Malaysia
Table 1.
Demographic profile of the study participants (n=470)
Table 1.
Variable Frequency
Age (y) 43.3±9.5
Sex
 Female 354 (75.3)
 Male 116 (24.7)
Ethnicity
 Malay 467 (99.4)
 Others 3 (0.6)
Marital status
 Single 73 (15.5)
 Married 373 (79.4)
 Divorced 6 (1.3)
 Widowed 18 (3.8)
Occupation
 Government employee 402 (85.5)
 Private sector 60 (12.8)
 Pensioner 3 (0.6)
 Others 5 (1.1)
Education level
 Primary school 3 (0.6)
 Secondary school (PMR/SRP) 2 (0.4)
 Secondary school (SPM) 16 (3.4)
 Religious school (Pondok) 2 (0.4)
 Diploma 37 (7.9)
 University and higher 410 (87.2)
Role
 Public school teacher 412 (87.7)
 Religious school teacher 58 (12.3)
Residency
 Urban 301 (64.0)
 Rural 169 (36.0)
Received information about infectious diseases
 Yes 441 (93.8)
 No 29 (6.2)

Data are presented as mean±standard deviation or n (%).

PMR, Penilaian Menengah Rendah (lower secondary assessment); SRP, Sijil Rendah Pelajaran (lower education certificate); SPM, Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (Malaysian certificate of education).

Table 2.
Results of the IRT analysis of the knowledge section (n=470)
Table 2.
Factor/items in original questionnaire IRT results CFA results
b a χ2 (df=8) p Recoded items Standardized item loading AVE CR
Information on infectious diseases 0.45 0.92
 Q1 –7.81 0.43 9.20 0.33 Q1 0.33
 Q3 –7.73 0.41 12.73 0.12 Q2 0.55
 Q4 –2.58 1.09 11.62 0.17 Q3 0.67
 Q7 –2.81 1.28 26.16 0.00 Q4 0.55
 Q8 –2.24 2.54 10.83 0.21 Q5 0.65
 Q9 –1.23 0.33 4.33 0.83 Q6 0.49
 Q10 –0.76 11.43 3.05 0.93 Q7 0.91
 Q11 –0.68 23.29 2.35 0.97 Q8 0.96
 Q12 –1.06 6.90 0.96 0.99 Q9 0.98
 Q14 –1.36 3.51 9.39 0.31 Q10 0.61
 Q15 –1.37 29.73 2.08 0.98 Q11 0.92
 Q16 –1.34 4.72 2.63 0.96 Q12 0.90
 Q17 –4.79 0.78 44.87 <0.001 Q13 0.62
 Q18 –3.52 0.78 65.61 <0.001 Q14 0.71
 Q22 –1.55 1.70 21.63 <0.001 Q15 0.61
 Q23 –1.54 1.47 23.42 <0.001 Q16 0.62
 Q24 –2.63 1.17 26.59 <0.001 Q17 0.65
 Q25 –2.94 0.72 6.48 0.59 Q18 0.60
Knowledge of CBS 0.58 0.78
 Q33 –1.52 3.10 27.66 <0.001 Q19 0.68
 Q34 –1.74 3.11 29.68 <0.001 Q20 0.85
 Q35R –1.19 2.07 51.82 <0.001 Q21R 0.74
Community-level case definition 0.50 0.93
 Q36 –1.33 2.38 11.55 0.17 Q22 0.69
 Q37 –2.44 1.66 9.48 0.30 Q23 0.74
 Q38 –1.63 1.00 34.37 <0.001 Q24 0.81
 Q39 –3.42 1.11 16.70 0.03 Q25 0.78
 Q40 –1.09 3.31 4.60 0.80 Q26 0.79
 Q41 –0.91 4.58 9.55 0.30 Q27 0.87
 Q42 –0.91 5.92 6.60 0.58 Q28 0.91
 Q43 –0.10 0.73 15.89 0.04 Q29 0.63
 Q44 –3.52 0.78 11.34 0.18 Q30 0.70
 Q45 –2.44 0.98 23.02 0.00 Q31 0.79

Items Q2, Q5, Q6, Q13, Q19, Q20, Q21, Q26, Q27, Q28, Q29, Q30, Q31, and Q32 were removed during IRT analysis.

IRT, item response theory; CFA, confirmatory factor analysis; χ2, chi-square; b, difficulty; a, discrimination; df, degree of freedom; AVE, average variance extracted; CR, composite reliability; CBS, community-based surveillance.

Table 3.
CFA model re-specification for the attitudes section
Table 3.
Model Modification CFI TLI SRMR RMSEA (90% CI) RMSEA p
Initial model (model 0) - 0.874 0.858 0.073 0.072 (0.066–0.079) <0.000
Model 1 Item Q48 removed (factor loading=0.140) 0.876 0.858 0.074 0.075 (0.069–0.082) <0.000
Model 2 Item Q47 removed SR=5.157) 0.893 0.877 0.071 0.072 (0.064–0.079) <0.000
Model 3 Correlated residual for item q45 with Q46 (MI=159.4) 0.937 0.927 0.067 0.055 (0.048–0.063) 0.126

CFA, confirmatory factor analysis; CFI, comparative fit index; TLI, Tucker-Lewis index; SRMR, standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; CI, confidence interval; SR, standardized residual; MI, modification index; -, no modification was made.

Table 4.
CFA of the attitudes section
Table 4.
Factor/item Initial CFA model (model 0) Final CFA model (model 3) Factor determinacy for model 3
λ AVE CR λ AVE CR
Behavioral likelihood (BL) 0.54 0.859 0.58 0.860 0.85
 Q45F1 0.484 0.441
 Q46F1 0.565 0.529
 Q47F1a) 0.530 -
 Q49F1 0.872 0.879
 Q50F1 0.830 0.835
 Q51F1 0.902 0.906
 Q52F1 0.865 0.870
Subjective norms (SN) 0.69 0.895 0.69 0.895 0.83
 Q39F2 0.728 0.728
 Q40F2 0.815 0.815
 Q41F2 0.905 0.905
 Q42F2 0.886 0.886
Intention to engage in CBS (INT) 0.31 0.714 0.31 0.714 0.94
 Q32F3 0.652 0.651
 Q33F3 0.627 0.628
 Q34F3 0.642 0.642
 Q36F3 0.334 0.332
 Q38F3 0.491 0.490
 Q43F3 0.388 0.387
Negative attitudes (ATT) 0.17 0.504 0.20 0.546 0.86
 Q35RF4 0.365 0.366
 Q37RF4 0.467 0.475
 Q44RF4 0.356 0.364
 Q48RF4b) 0.140 -
 Q53RF4 0.424 0.415
 Q54RF4 0.665 0.658

CFA, confirmatory factor analysis; λ, factor loadings, AVE, average variance extracted; CR, composite reliability.

a)Item Q47 was excluded from the final model due to a high standardized residual;

b)Item Q48 was excluded from the final model due to low factor loading; -, the item was removed.

Table 5.
CFA model re-specification for the perceptions section
Table 5.
Model Modification CFI TLI SRMR RMSEA (90% CI) RMSEA p
Initial model (model 0) None 0.850 0.827 0.091 0.094 (0.087–0.102) <0.000
Model 1 Q70RF3 removed low factor loading 0.866 0.845 0.089 0.093 (0.085– 0.101) <0.000
Model 2a) Q66RF3 removed low factor loading 0.880 0.860 0.085 0.092 (0.084–0.101) <0.000
Model 3 Q69RF3 removed low factor loading 0.884 0.862 0.084 0.096 (0.087–0.106) <0.000
Model 4 Q55RF3 removed low factor loading 0.905 0.886 0.065 0.069 (0.063–0.075) <0.000
Model 5 Correlate item 56 with 57 (MI=191.9) 0.952 0.941 0.068 0.066 (0.055–0.077) 0.011
Model 6 Correlate item 61with 62 (MI=63.4) 0.962 0.954 0.055 0.059 (0.047–0.070) 0.111

CFA, confirmatory factor analysis; CFI, comparative fit index; TLI, Tucker-Lewis index; SRMR, standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; CI, confidence interval; MI, modification index.

a)Model 2: items (Q55, Q66, Q69, Q70) were removed, and residuals of the following items were correlated (Q56–Q57) and (Q61–Q62).

Table 6.
Results of CFA of the perceptions domain
Table 6.
Factor/item Initial CFA model (model 0) Final CFA model (model 6) Factor determinacy for model 6
λ AVE CR λ AVE CR
Perceived susceptibility (SUS) 0.58 0.862 0.545 0.816 0.83
 Q56F1 0.629 0.621
 Q57F1 0.609 0.594
 Q61F1 0.841 0.787
 Q62F1 0.854 0.799
 Q63F1 0.842 0.873
Perceived benefit (BEN) 0.65 0.904 0.65 0.904 0.85
 Q71F2 0.702 0.702
 Q72F2 0.803 0.804
 Q73F2 0.889 0.889
 Q74F2 0.834 0.835
 Q75F2 0.811 0.810
Perceived barriers (BARR) 0.23 0.504 0.58 0.808 0.82
 Q58RF3 0.741 0.731
 Q59RF3 0.755 0.765
 Q60RF3 0.789 0.796
 Q55RF3a) 0.274 -
 Q66RF3a) 0.145 -
 Q69RF3a) 0.160 -
 Q70RF3a) 0.105 -
Self-efficacy (SE) 0.53 0.819 0.53 0.820 0.85
 Q64F4 0.794 0.791
 Q65F4 0.782 0.777
 Q67F4 0.627 0.630
 Q68F4 0.739 0.745

CFA, confirmatory factor analysis; λ, factor loadings, AVE, average variance extracted; CR, composite reliability; -, the item was removed.

a)Item Q55, Q66, Q69, and Q70 were excluded from the final model due to a high standardized residual.

  • 1. Jung J, Larsen TM, Beledi AH, et al. Community-based surveillance programme evaluation using the platform Nyss implemented by the Somali Red Crescent Society: a mixed methods approach. Confl Health 2024;18:20.
  • 2. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) (CH). Community-Based Surveillance-Indonesian Red Cross experience [Internet]. IFRC; 2021 [cited 2024 Feb 1]. Available from: https://www.ifrc.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/CaseStudy_Indonesia_CommunityBasedSurveillance_IFRC-PMI_English_short.pdf.
  • 3. McGowan CR, Takahashi E, Romig L, et al. Community-based surveillance of infectious diseases: a systematic review of drivers of success. BMJ Glob Health 2022;7:e009934.
  • 4. Technical Contributors to the June 2018 WHO meeting. A definition for community-based surveillance and a way forward: results of the WHO global technical meeting, France, 26 to 28 June 2018. Euro Surveill 2019;24:1800681.
  • 5. Metuge A, Omam LA, Jarman E, et al. Humanitarian led community-based surveillance: case study in Ekondo-titi, Cameroon. Confl Health 2021;15:17.
  • 6. Merali S, Asiedu-Bekoe F, Clara A, et al. Community-based surveillance advances the Global Health Security Agenda in Ghana. PLoS One 2020;15:e0237320.
  • 7. Kisanga A, Abiuda B, Walyaula P, et al. Evaluation of the functionality and effectiveness of the CORE Group Polio Project’s community-based acute flaccid paralysis surveillance system in South Sudan. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2019;101(4_Suppl). 91−9.
  • 8. World Health Organization (WHO) (CH). WHO COVID-19 social science in outbreak response: community-centred approaches to health emergencies: progress, gaps and research priorities [Internet]. WHO; 2021 [cited 2023 Jan 3]. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/community-centred-approaches-to-health-emergencies-progress-gaps-and-research-priorities-who-covid-19-social-science-in-outbreak-response.
  • 9. Byrne A. Halting epidemics at the outset: community-based surveillance (CBS) in an epidemic preparedness model for early detection and early action. Int J Infect Dis 2022;116:S98.
  • 10. OKeeffe J, Takahashi E, Otshudiema JO, et al. Strengthening community-based surveillance: lessons learned from the 2018-2020 Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) Ebola outbreak. Confl Health 2023;17:41.
  • 11. Ratnayake R, Finger F, Edmunds WJ, et al. Early detection of cholera epidemics to support control in fragile states: estimation of delays and potential epidemic sizes. BMC Med 2020;18:397.
  • 12. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) (CH). Community-Based Surveillance: guiding principles [Internet]. IFRC; 2017 [cited 2022 Dec 25]. Available from: https://www.ifrc.org/document/community-based-surveillance-guiding-principles.
  • 13. Guerra J, Acharya P, Barnadas C. Community-based surveillance: a scoping review. PLoS One 2019;14:e0215278.
  • 14. Bruckner C, Checchi F. Detection of infectious disease outbreaks in twenty-two fragile states, 2000-2010: a systematic review. Confl Health 2011;5:13.
  • 15. Ratnayake R, Tammaro M, Tiffany A, et al. People-centred surveillance: a narrative review of community-based surveillance among crisis-affected populations. Lancet Planet Health 2020;4:e483−95.
  • 16. Charles ML, Fievre G. Engaging Haitian community leaders in emergency preparedness. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 2021;55:102091.
  • 17. Kouadio IK, Aljunid S, Kamigaki T, et al. Infectious diseases following natural disasters: prevention and control measures. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2012;10:95−104.
  • 18. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) (CH). Our volunteers [Internet]. IFRC; 2024 [cited 2024 Jul 29]. Available from: https://www.ifrc.org/get-involved/volunteer-us/our-volunteers.
  • 19. Ministry of Health Malaysia (MY). Event-Based Surveillance Protocol [Internet]. Ministry of Health Malaysia; 2018 [cited 2024 Nov 20]. Available from: https://www2.moh.gov.my/moh/resources/Penerbitan/Garis%20Panduan/Garis%20panduan%20Umum%20(Awam)/Buku_Event-Based_Surveillance.pdf.
  • 20. Hasan AA, Bachok NA, Yaacob NM, et al. Assessing community leaders’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions on community-based surveillance of infectious diseases: development and validation of a questionnaire. Med J Babylon 2025;22:156−63.
  • 21. Clara A, Ndiaye SM, Joseph B, et al. Community-based surveillance in Côte d'Ivoire. Health Secur 2020;18(S1). S23−33.
  • 22. Arifin (MY). Sample size calculator [Internet]. Wnarifin; 2024 [cited 2024 Nov 7]. Available from: https://wnarifin.github.io/ssc_web.html.
  • 23. Rosseel Y. lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J Stat Softw 2012;48:1−36.
  • 24. Hou D, Al-Tabbaa A, Chen H, et al. Factor analysis and structural equation modelling of sustainable behaviour in contaminated land remediation. J Clean Prod 2014;84:439−49.
  • 25. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al. Multivariate data analysis. 2nd ed. Cengage; 2019.
  • 26. Hassim SR, Arifin WN, Kueh YC, et al. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Malay version of the Smartphone Addiction Scale among medical students in Malaysia. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:3820.
  • 27. Raykov T, Marcoulides GA. Scale reliability evaluation under multiple assumption violations. Struct Equ Modeling 2016;23:302−13.
  • 28. Bean GJ, Bowen NK. Item response theory and confirmatory factor analysis: complementary approaches for scale development. J Evid Based Soc Work 2021;18:597−618.
  • 29. Wang J, Wang X. Structural equation modeling: applications using Mplus. 2nd ed. Wiley; 2020.
  • 30. Klenyuie WK. Evaluation of community-based surveillance system pilot, Ketu South Municipality, Ghana, 2017–2018. Int J Infect Dis 2020;101:364.
  • 31. Okolie MN, Okereke UC, Ezenyeaku CC, et al. Predictors of functionality of the community-based disease surveillance and notification system in Anambra State, Nigeria. Int J Trop Dis Health 2022;43:1−12.
  • 32. Ezenyeaku CA, Nnebue CC, Nwabueze SA, et al. Completeness of reporting in the community-based disease surveillance and notification system in Anambra state, Nigeria. Am J Pub Health Res 2020;8:77−86.
  • 33. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) (CH). Community-Based Surveillance Assessment Tool [Internet]. IFRC; 2019 [cited 2024 Nov 7]. Available from: https://www.ifrc.org/document/ifrc-community-based-surveillance-assessment-tool.
  • 34. Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. 2nd ed. Division Guilford Publications; 2015. p. 91−2.
  • 35. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al. Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed. Pearson Education Limited; 2014.
  • 36. Zahiruddin WM, Arifin WN, Mohd-Nazri S, et al. Development and validation of a new knowledge, attitude, belief and practice questionnaire on leptospirosis in Malaysia. BMC Public Health 2018;18:331.
  • 37. Abdullah M, Azib WN, Harun M, et al. Reliability and construct validity of knowledge, attitude and practice on dengue fever prevention questionnaire. Am Int J Contemp Res 2013;3:69−75.
  • 38. Hiew CC, Chin YS, Chan YM, et al. Development and validation of knowledge, attitude and practice on healthy lifestyle questionnaire (KAP-HLQ) for Malaysian adolescents. J Nutr Health Sci 2015;2:407.
  • 39. Hung SP, Liao YH, Eccleston C, et al. Developing a shortened version of the dementia knowledge assessment scale (DKAS-TC) with a sample in Taiwan: an item response theory approach. BMC Geriatr 2022;22:886.
  • 40. Edelen MO, Reeve BB. Applying item response theory (IRT) modeling to questionnaire development, evaluation, and refinement. Qual Life Res 2007;16 Suppl 1:5−18.
  • 41. DiStefano C, Liu J, Jiang N, et al. Examination of the weighted root mean square residual: evidence for trustworthiness? Struct Equ Modeling 2018;25:453−66.
  • 42. Shuan DQ. A structural equation model of mental health literacy, psychological factors and mental health help-seeking intention among undergraduate students in Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia [Internet]. Universiti Sains Malaysia; 2020 [cited 2024 Nov 11]. Available from: https://erepo.usm.my/handle/123456789/17679.
  • 43. Newsom JT. Some clarifications and recommendations on fit indices [Internet]. Portland State University; 2023 [cited 2024 Nov 11]. Available from: https://web.pdx.edu/~newsomj/semclass/.

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

Include:

A confirmatory analysis of the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions questionnaire for community-based surveillance of infectious diseases: a cross-sectional study in Malaysia
Osong Public Health Res Perspect. 2025;16(5):508-518.   Published online August 12, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24171/j.phrp.2025.0106
Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
Format:
Include:
A confirmatory analysis of the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions questionnaire for community-based surveillance of infectious diseases: a cross-sectional study in Malaysia
Osong Public Health Res Perspect. 2025;16(5):508-518.   Published online August 12, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24171/j.phrp.2025.0106
Close

Figure

PHRP : Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives

About

Browse articles 

Editorial policies

For authors  

phrp 사이트 QRCODE(URL : https://ophrp.org)
© Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency.