Abstract Background HIV-related stigma remains a major psychosocial challenge affecting mental health, healthcare engagement, and quality of life among people living with HIV. Reliable and culturally appropriate brief instruments are essential for stigma assessment in both research and clinical practice; however, validated Vietnamese measures remain limited. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Vietnamese version of the 12-item HIV Stigma Scale (HSS-12). Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 245 people living with HIV receiving antiretroviral therapy at a primary healthcare facility in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Test–retest reliability was evaluated in a subsample of 56 participants over a 4-week interval using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Construct validity was examined using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), comparing a hypothesized four-factor model with a one-factor alternative model. Convergent validity was assessed through correlations with depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9; PHQ-9) and perceived social support (Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support; MSPSS). Results The Vietnamese HSS-12 demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.85) and excellent test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.95). CFA supported a four-factor structure with improved model fit after allowing correlations between item residuals (CFI = 0.962; TLI = 0.945; RMSEA = 0.064; SRMR = 0.050), whereas the one-factor model showed poor fit. Convergent validity was supported by positive correlations between HSS-12 scores and PHQ-9 scores, and negative correlations with MSPSS scores, except for the disclosure concerns subscale. Conclusions The Vietnamese version of the HSS-12 is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing perceived HIV-related stigma among people living with HIV in Vietnam. This brief measure may facilitate standardized stigma assessment in psychological research and routine care settings.
Thuong et al. (Sun,) studied this question.