Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34331172›Full record

ArticleJournal of religion and health2021

Psychometric Validation and Translation of Religious and Spiritual Measures.

Harold G Koenig, Faten Al Zaben

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of religion and health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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

71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Harold G KoenigDepartments of Psychiatry and Medicine, Duke University Health System, Durham, NC, 27705, USA. Harold.Koenig@duke.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2573-6121
Faten Al ZabenDivision of Psychiatry, Department of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Scale development, validation, and translation are complicated and often arduous procedures that involve considerable cost, time, personnel, and skills necessary to perform the complex statistical analyses required. The need to follow a standard procedure when developing new scales and translating old scales into new languages is essential in order to ensure that researchers accurately measure what they are claiming to measure. Well-designed scales form the foundation for much of the quantitative research conducted today in the psychological, social, behavioral and physical health sciences. This is also true for studies that examine the relationship between religiosity and/or spirituality (R/S) and health. The relationship between R/S and health is a complex one, requiring the development of measures that comprehensively, sensitively, reliably, and accurately measure R/S. As with many other emerging areas in the health sciences, quantitative measurement using psychometrically sound scales and the translation of existing scales into other languages is essential for advancement of the field of religion and health. In this article, a standard procedure for developing, validating, and translating multi-item scales is described.

Indexed as

SpiritualityTranslationsHumansPsychometricsReligionSurveys and QuestionnairesMeasurementReligiosityScale developmentScale psychometric propertiesScale translationSpirituality

Identifiers

PMID34331172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.