ArticlePloS one2021
General self-efficacy in individuals with visual impairment compared with the general population.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rasch analysis of the new general self efficacy scale: an evaluation of its psychometric properties in older adults with low vision.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Trial
- Family function and health self-management ability among older adults from mountainous areas in China: moderated mediation model in a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Validity and reliability of the Chinese version of human-robot interaction self-efficacy scale in Chinese adults.Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2024Article
- Visual impairment and employment in Norway.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Pathways from self-disclosure to medical coping strategy among adolescents with moderate and major depression during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mediation of self-efficacy.Frontiers in psychiatry · 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
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKnowledge about self-efficacy and its significance for the quality of life of people with visual impairment is lacking. The aims of the study were to compare general self-efficacy in individuals with visual impairment with the general population, and to investigate the association between self-efficacy and life satisfaction.
methodsA telephone-based cross-sectional survey was conducted between January and May 2017 in a probability sample of adults who were members of the Norwegian Association of the Blind and Partially Sighted. Participants were asked questions about their sociodemographic characteristics, characteristics of vision loss, general self-efficacy (General Self-efficacy Scale), and life satisfaction (Cantril's Ladder of Life Satisfaction). We obtained norm data from a representative survey of the general Norwegian population (N = 1792; mean age 53.2 years; 52.5% females).
resultsPeople with visual impairment had higher levels of general self-efficacy than people in the general population (Mean: 31.5 versus 29.0, p < .001). Results from linear regression analyses of the visual impairment population showed that higher education and residential in an urban municipality were associated with higher self-efficacy. Having additional impairments and a previous history of physical or sexual assaults were associated with lower self-efficacy. A linear dose-response relationship was found between self-efficacy and life satisfaction, in the visual impairment population as well as in the general population.
conclusionsPeople with visual impairment have higher self-efficacy than people in the general population, possibly due to extensive mastery experience in how to handle life as visually impaired. Self-efficacy seems to be important in achieving the best possible life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.