QCC scale versions

On this page, we summarize the settings in which each QCC Scale was developed and link to all versions of the measure. PDFs for each version include detailed information on the items, response options, and scoring for each scale.

QCC-Mexico (22 items)

Study staff administered the QCC survey to 499 family planning clients as they finished their family planning visits in public clinics and hospitals in two states (San Luis Potosí and Mexico City).  

  • Access Spanish version here 
  • Access English version here 

QCC-Ethiopia (26 items)

Study staff administered the QCC survey to 599 family planning clients in Addis Ababa as they finished their family planning in public health centers and franchise clinics of a large non-governmental organization providing reproductive health services. 

  • Access English version here
  • Access Amharic version here
  • Access Afan Oromo version here

QCC-India (23 items)

Study staff administered the QCC survey to 313 family planning clients about their most recent experience in government public health centers in the state of Gujarat. 

  • Access English version here
  • Access Gujarati version here

QCC-10

The QCC-10 is a short (10-item) form of the original QCC Scales that retains coverage of the original measurement framework. The QCC-10 was developed using secondary analysis of client survey data collected previously for validating the QCC-Mexico, QCC-Ethiopia, and QCC-India Scales. 

  • Access English version here
  • Access Spanish version here
  • Access Amharic version here
  • Access Afan Oromo version here
  • Access Gujarati version here

QCC-Portugal

Researchers at the Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Lisboa and the Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina (School of Nursing of Lisbon and the University of Lisbon, Faculty of Medicine) adapted and validated the QCC Scale for use among the Portuguese Population through a study with 172 women

Access QCC PT validation article here

Table 1. QCC-Mexico (M), QCC-Ethiopia (E), QCC-India (I), QCC-10 (10) Scale items1

 

Item abbreviation

Item

Scale inclusion

Key reason selected or not selected for QCC-10

QCC Subscale: Information Exchange

1

opinion

During the contraception consultation, I was able to give my opinion about what I needed.

M, E, I, 10

Selected: High number of votes

2

personal

The provider asked me questions in order to provide counselling that fit my personal experience.

E, I, 10

Selected: Concept of personalized counselling key component of QCC construct

3

info

I received complete information about my options for contraceptive methods.

M, E, I, 10

Selected: Concept of information receipt key component of QCC construct

4

explain

The provider knew how to explain contraception clearly.

M, E 1

Not selected: Performed poorly in India, no votes

5

opportunity

I had the opportunity to participate in the selection of a method. 

M, E, I

Not selected: Performed poorly in India

6

sti_info

I received information about how to protect myself from sexually transmitted infections.

M, E, I,

Not selected: STI information receipt not central to QCC construct

7

method_fail

I received information about what to do if a method fails (e.g., broken condom, forget a pill, forgot injection appointment, feel an IUD is poorly placed)

M, E, I

Not selected: item less relevant for clients who do not select a method

8

body_react

I could understand how my body might react to using contraception.

M, E, I, 10

Selected: Concept of side effect understanding central to QCC construct

9

method_use

I could understand how to use the method(s) we talked about during the consultation.

M, E, I, 10

Selected: Concept of understanding method use central to QCC construct

10

method_react

The provider explained to me what to do if I had a reaction to a method (e.g., allergies, nausea, pains, menstrual changes).

M, E, I

Not selected: item less relevant for clients who do not select a method

11

method_stop

I received information about what to do if I wanted to stop using a method.

M, E, I

Not selected: item less relevant for clients who do not select a method

QCC Subscale: Interpersonal Relationships

12

info_private

I felt the information I shared with the provider was going to stay between us.

M, E, I

Not selected: Performed poorly in India

13

enough_time

The provider gave me the time I needed to consider the contraceptive options we discussed.

M, E, I, 10

Selected: Concept of informed decision-making central to QCC construct

14

prov_friendly

The provider was friendly during the contraception consultation.

M, E 2

Not selected: Performed poorly in India

15

prov_knows

I felt the health care provider had sufficient knowledge about contraceptive methods.

M, E 2

Not selected: Performed poorly in India, no votes

16

prov_health

The provider showed interest in my health while we talked about contraception.

M, E, I

Not selected: items 1 and 18 are similar and received more votes

17

prov_opinion

The provider was interested in my opinions.

M, E, I

Not selected: items 1 and 18 are similar and received more votes

18

express_self

I felt encouraged to ask questions and express my concerns.

E, I, 10 3

Selected: High number of votes

19

prov_listens

I felt listened to by the provider.

M, E, I

Not selected: items 1 and 18 are similar and received more votes

20

no_interrupt

The provider made efforts to ensure there were no interruptions during our session.

E, I, 10 3

Selected: Concept of privacy is central to the QCC construct

QCC Subscale: Disrespect and Abuse

21

prov_insist

The health care provider pressured me to use the method they wanted me to use.

M, E, I, 104

Selected: high number of votes; despite low loadings in Ethiopia and India, absence of coercion is central to QCC construct

22

prov_judge

I felt the provider treated me poorly because they tend to judge people. (Clothing, age, living condition, marital status, etc.)

M, E, I

Not selected: No votes

23

scold_age (or scold_use, in India)

I felt scolded because of my age.

M, E, I 5

Not selected: No votes

24

prov_sexlife

The provider made me feel uncomfortable because of my sex life (e.g., when I started having sex, my sexual preferences, the number of partners I have, the number of children I have).

M, E, I

Not selected: item deemed too long and less central to QCC construct than item 26 which is also focused on discrimination 

25

prov_touched

The provider touched me or looked at me in a way that made me feel uncomfortable.

M, E, I

Not selected: this item received lower votes than other Disrespect and Abuse subscale items 

26

scold_marital

I felt scolded because of my marital status.

E, I, 10 6

Selected: discrimination is a central component of QCC construct

1 While English versions are presented in this Table, note that items were fielded in Mexico in Spanish, in Ethiopia in Amharic, and in India in Gujarati. 1 This item was added to the QCC Scale for Ethiopia and India based on formative research suggesting this is an important element of quality related to Information Exchange; this item was not fielded in Mexico. In India the wording was modified for clarity, based on cognitive interviews, to read “The provider asked me personal questions …”.

2 Removed due to low factor loadings in CFA in India

3 This item was added to the QCC Scale for Ethiopia and India based on formative research suggesting this is an important element of quality related to Interpersonal Relationships; this item was not fielded in Mexico

4 This item loaded as part of the Disrespect and Abuse subscale in the original scale development in Mexico, but was moved to the conceptually-related Interpersonal Relationship subscale in India and Ethiopia after it performed poorly on the Disrespect and Abuse subscale in CFA modeling

5 In India, this item was replaced with “I felt scolded because of the way I was using contraception” based on formative research suggesting the importance of social norms around what contraceptives are acceptable to be used depending on the number of children someone has and the greater salience of this potential dimension of discrimination compared to age discrimination

6 This item was added to the QCC Scale for Ethiopia and India based on formative research suggesting marital status as an important dimension of potential discrimination; this item was not fielded in Mexico