Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33334064›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Scaling Down the PGCM Scale to Assess Views on Ageing More Efficiently: Finding a New Alternative.

Tomáš Doseděl, Tereza Menšíková, Lucie Vidovićová

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 81% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tomáš DosedělFaculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University, Joštova 10, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0003-1931-9137
Tereza MenšíkováFaculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University, Joštova 10, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0003-2823-3263
Lucie VidovićováFaculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University, Joštova 10, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-3895-100X
Masaryk University · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the study is to present a new and efficient way of measuring the quality of life among older populations, with special attention to morale, positive outlook on life and ageing. The measure is based on the Philadelphia Geriatric Center Morale Scale (PGCM), originally consisting of 22 items. The growing numbers and proportions of older people among European populations has increased the need to obtain more reliable data on their needs, values, life experiences and overall quality of life. Using data from six surveys conducted in the Czech Republic, we have formulated a three-item positive outlook on life and ageing (POLA) scale. Our analyses are divided into three steps: (1) constructing the scale and testing its internal consistency; (2) testing the scale's external validity using mean comparisons and correlation coefficients; and (3) determining the factors affecting a positive outlook on later life, such as gender and education. We have confirmed that the three-item approach to measuring positive outlook on ageing as a part of morale is highly applicable to surveys, producing compelling results in assessing important quality-of-life sub-concepts, such as subjective health, subjective age, and loneliness.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAgedAged, 80 and overAgingCzech RepublicFemaleHumansMaleMoralePsychometricsSurveys and QuestionnairesATOAmeasurementmoralePGCMPhiladelphia Geriatric Center Morale ScalePOLApositive outlookquality of lifeviews on ageing

Identifiers

PMID33334064
PMCPMC7765537
OpenAlexW3112055484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.