ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2020
Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Chinese Version of the Work-Ability Support Scale (WSS) in Young and Middle-Aged Stroke Survivors.
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing the return-to-work mode of precarious workers with mental health issues: reliability, validity, and usability of the REMODE-tool.European journal of public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose To translate and cross-culturally adapt the Work-Ability Support Scale (WSS) into Chinese and evaluate the reliability and validity of the measure among young and middle-aged stroke survivors. Methods A total of 210 participants aged 28-60 years were recruited from two communities in Zhengzhou. Item analysis, internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, and construct validity were tested. Results A moderate level of correlation between the items and the domains (r > 0.60), and the significant differences in items between the high group and the low group were tested by independent sample t-tests (P < 0.001). For Part A, Cronbach's α of the domains "physical", "thinking and communication", and "social/behavioural" was 0.865, 0.857 and 0.912, respectively. The Cronbach's α coefficient of Part A of the WSS was calculated as 0.931. The Cronbach's α of Part B was 0.761, with Cronbach's α values of 0.795, 0.649 and 0.643 for "personal factors", "environmental factors (within the workplace)", and "barriers to return to work", respectively. The split-half coefficients of Parts A and B were assessed as 0.804 and 0.559, respectively. The kappa coefficient of the other items all exceeded 0.60 (P < 0.001), except for a few items. The scale-level content validity index (S-CVI) was 0.94 and 0.90 for Parts A and B, respectively. The original construct of the scale was examined by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and model fit indices were mostly satisfactory. Conclusion The WSS is a reliable and valid tool for measuring young and middle-aged Chinese stroke survivors' work ability and support needs during their return to work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32020495What 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.