ReviewNursing research
Item Generation and Content Validity of the Child-Adolescent Bullying Scale.
Review in Nursing research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uncovering the Relationship Between Bullying, Social Communication Challenges, and the Emergence of Mental Health Problems Among Saudi Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Content and Clinical Validation of the Nursing Outcome "Health Literacy Behaviour": A Validation Protocol.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Quality Improvement Initiative to Screen for Bullying in Pediatric Orthopedic Outpatient Clinics.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare providers do not uniformly screen young patients for exposure to bullying, and no screening instruments have been developed for widespread use in clinical settings.
objectivesThe objectives of this study were to (a) generate scale items by identifying and eliciting concepts relevant to youths with potential exposure to bullying as well as to professionals who work with bullied youths and (b) assess the content validity of the new Child-Adolescent Bullying Scale (CABS) instrument.
methodsA mixed-methods design was used to develop an initial pool of 52 items. The study was conducted in four phases: (I) comprehensive review of the existing literature; (II) concept elicitation through the conduct of focus groups with school-age youths and professionals who work with bullied youths; (III) concept selection and item construction; and (IV) content validation assessment of relevance, clarity, and dimension of each item by a panel of 30 international bullying and measurement experts through completion of an online survey.
resultsAn initial pool of 52 potential items was developed during Phases I-III of the study. During Phase IV, item- and scale-level content validity indices were calculated and were used to refine the item pool. These strategies resulted in a new, 22-item tool, with scale-level content validity indices of .954 for clarity and .920 for representativeness. DISCUSSION: Evaluation of the CABS tool with a sample of youths drawn from healthcare settings will be necessary to assess the performance of the CABS items, further evaluate its psychometric properties, and further refine the tool.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.