Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34026367›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2021

Psychometric properties of the Swedish version of the satisfaction with life scale in a sample of individuals with mental illness.

Danilo Garcia, Ali Al Nima, Maryam Kazemitabar, Clara Amato, Franco Lucchese, Marko Mihailovic, Nobuhiko Kijima

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Danilo GarciaDepartment of Behavioral Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-3356-4454
Ali Al NimaDepartment of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Maryam KazemitabarDepartment of Psychology, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-6639-9809
Clara AmatoBlekinge Centre of Competence, Region Blekinge, Karlskrona, Sweden.
Franco LucchesePromotion of Health and Innovation (PHI) Lab, Network for Well-Being, Italy.
Marko MihailovicDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, United States.
Nobuhiko KijimaPromotion of Health and Innovation (PHI) Lab, Network for Well-Being, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth assessment among individuals with mental health problems often involves measures of ill-being (e.g., anxiety, depression). Health is, however, defined as a state of physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease (WHO, 1948, 2001). Hence, in order to address mental illness during the 21

methodA total of 264 participants (age mean = 43.46,

resultsWe found positive and significant relationships between the five items of the scale (

conclusionsConsistent with previous research, the scale had good reliability and provided good information across most of the latent trait range. In addition, within this population, sociodemographic factors such as gender and occupation status do not influence how individuals respond to the items in the scale. However, the items couldn't measure extreme levels of low/high life satisfaction. We suggest replication of these findings, the test of additional items, and the modification of items 2 and 5 in order to use the scale among individuals with mental illness.

Indexed as

Classical test theoryItem response theoryLife satisfactionMental illnessSatisfaction with life scale

Identifiers

PMID34026367
PMCPMC8123228

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.