ArticleSpinal cord2021
Validation of the Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ) in a spinal cord injury population.
Article in Spinal cord, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early risk factors and six month posttraumatic stress disorder symptom severity following trauma.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Use of PROMs in Paediatric Orthopaedic Registries.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 2. Understanding the lived experience in people with spinal cord injury.Spinal cord · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective analysis of cross-sectional data.
objectivesTo verify the factor structure of the Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ) using a sample of individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) and to assess IEQ scale reliability and construct validity using the same population.
settingTwo SCI rehabilitation sites in the United States.
methodsThree datasets were combined to conduct this validation study. The sample consisted of 341 adults with SCI who completed the IEQ, measures of psychological distress and pain, and provided sociodemographic and injury-related information. A series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and exploratory factor analyses (EFA) were conducted to verify the two-factor structure of the IEQ, Cronbach's alpha was used to demonstrate scale reliability, and correlations between the IEQ and measures of pain and psychological distress were examined to assess construct validity.
resultsPoor model fit was observed for the two-factor structure of the IEQ as well as for the subsequent factor-structures that were explored. The IEQ demonstrated strong scale reliability (α = 0.89) and correlations between the IEQ and measures of pain and psychological distress were in the expected direction, indicating good construct validity.
conclusionsIn this preliminary validation study, we failed to confirm the two-factor structure of the IEQ in a population of individuals with SCI. Though good scale reliability and construct validity were observed, further study is needed to refine the IEQ for use in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34052836What 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.