Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30903648›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational health2019

Measurement properties and implications of the Brief Resilience Scale in healthy workers.

Remko Soer, Marianne W M C Six Dijkstra, Hendrik J Bieleman, Roy E Stewart, Michiel F Reneman, Frits G J Oosterveld, Karlein M G Schreurs

Registry-linked trialAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05757180 (Recalling and Anticipating Specific Positive Events to Boost Resilience in Adolescents), which is not on this map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05757180 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Recalling and Anticipating Specific Positive Events to Boost Resilience in Adolescents

TypeinterventionalSponsorProf. dr. Filip RaesRan2022 to 2023Enrolled191ConditionsSpecific Positive Memories, Specific Positive Future Events, Resilience, Mental WellbeingArmsPositive Events Training (PET), CREAtive writing Training (CREAT)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Remko SoerSaxion University of Applied Sciences, Expertise Center of Physical Activity and Health, Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4154-1711
Marianne W M C Six DijkstraSaxion University of Applied Sciences, Expertise Center of Physical Activity and Health, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Hendrik J BielemanSaxion University of Applied Sciences, Expertise Center of Physical Activity and Health, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Roy E StewartDepartment of Health Sciences, Community and Occupational Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Michiel F RenemanDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Frits G J OosterveldSaxion University of Applied Sciences, Expertise Center of Physical Activity and Health, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Karlein M G SchreursCentre for eHealth and Wellbeing, Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.

Funding

Tech for Future TFF150101
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to study measurement properties of the Dutch Language Version of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS-DLV) in blue and white collar workers employed at multiple companies and to compare the validity and factor structure to other language versions.

methodsWorkers (n = 1023) were assessed during a cross-sectional health surveillance. Construct validity was tested with exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) and hypothesis testing. Reliability was tested with Cronbach's alpha.

resultsA two-factor structure of the BRS-DLV had good model fit in both EFA and CFA, which could be explained by difficulties of workers with reversed order items. After excluding these inconsistent answering patterns, a one-factor structure showed good model fit resembling the original BRS (χ

conclusionsReliability of the BRS-DLV is sufficient and there is evidence of construct validity. Inconsistent answering, however, caused problems in interpretation and factor structure of the BRS-DLV. This can be easily detected and handled because item 2, 4 and 6 are in reversed order. Other language versions differ in factor structure, most likely because systematic errors are not corrected for. To collect valid data, it is advised to be aware of inconsistent answering of respondents.

Indexed as

Resilience, PsychologicalAdultBrief Psychiatric Rating ScaleCross-Sectional StudiesFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansLanguageMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedNetherlandsOccupational DiseasesPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnairesemployabilityfactor structurehealth preventionreliabilityresiliencevalidity

Identifiers

PMID30903648
PMCPMC6499349

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.