ArticleSaudi medical journal2019
Adaptation and validation of the Arabic version of self-efficacy scale for mammography. A report on psychometric properties.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Translation and cross-cultural validation of the non-invasive prenatal testing questionnaire in Arabic.Saudi medical journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo culturally adapt and validate a mammography-specific self-efficacy (MSSE) scale into Arabic for the Saudi Arabian context. Methods: A methodological study aimed at tool translation and adaptation conducted in primary healthcare centers in Al Madinah, Saudi Arabia between March 2016 and May 2016. The MSSE scale was translated and adapted into Arabic using standard procedures. Content and face validity were investigated. Confirmatory factor analysis and reliability analysis were used to determine the scale's psychometric properties. Results: The scale showed a good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.88). The confirmatory factor analysis supported the scale's single-factor structure and the goodness-of-fit indices confirmed the model's good fit (comparative fit index=0.961, Tucker-Lewis index=0.943, root-mean-square error of approximation=0.076, and standardized root-mean-square residual=0.045). Women who had a mammogram in the last 2 years scored significantly higher on the scale (39±6.2) than women who had never received a mammogram (35.88±7.2; p=0.009). Conclusion: The study confirmed that the scale's Arabic version has good psychometric properties, using reliability analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and extreme groups validation. The scale is likely to be useful for evaluating interventional studies aimed at improving mammography screening participation rates.
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.