Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33850411›Full record

ArticleCurrent psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)2023

Validity and reliability of the German versions of the CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-2.

Anna Irena Wollny, Ingo Jacobs

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anna Irena WollnyUniversity of Potsdam, Am Neuen Palais 10, Haus 22, 14469 Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2719-3132
Ingo JacobsMedical School Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8458-1134
MSB Medical School Berlin · DEUniversity of Potsdam · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) is an established instrument to assess trait resilience. The present study investigates the psychometric properties of the brief German CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-2 in an online sample of 360 students. The CD-RISC-10 showed good reliability, whereas the CD-RISC-2 just missed an acceptable level of reliability. The unifactorial structure of the CD-RISC-10 was supported in a confirmatory factor analysis. Correlational analysis with various clinical and non-clinical constructs (e.g., trait resilience, trait emotional intelligence, life satisfaction, well-being, perceived stress, sleep problems, anxiety, depression, and mental and physical health related quality of life) provided evidence for convergent, divergent, and incremental validity of both brief versions of the CD-RISC. Measured with the CD-RISC-10, trait resilience buffered the effects of perceived stress on life satisfaction and aggregated mental health problems, but not on physical health related quality of life. For the CD-RISC-2, a buffer effect was only found for life satisfaction. Taken together, the results of the present study provide support for the validity of the CD-RISC-10 and, to a lesser extent, of the CD-RISC-2. Implications and limitations of the results will be discussed.

Indexed as

Buffer effectMental healthPhysical healthPsychometric qualityTrait emotional intelligenceTrait resilience

Identifiers

PMID33850411
PMCPMC8032848
OpenAlexW3154774448

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.