Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35162192›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

The Portuguese Third Version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire: Preliminary Validation Studies of the Middle Version among Municipal and Healthcare Workers.

Teresa P Cotrim, Pedro Bem-Haja, Anabela Pereira, Cláudia Fernandes, Rui Azevedo, Samuel Antunes, Joaquim S Pinto, Flávio Kanazawa, Isabel Souto, Elisabeth Brito and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Healthcare Services and Formal Caregiver's Psychosocial Risk Factors: An Observational Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Observational
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

11 authors.

Teresa P CotrimErgonomics Laboratory, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, 1499-002 Cruz-Quebrada, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-2950-5208
Pedro Bem-HajaCINTESIS, Department of Education and Psychology, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.
Anabela PereiraCIDTFF, Department of Education and Psychology, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.
Cláudia FernandesCATIM, Technological Center, 4100-414 Porto, Portugal.
Rui AzevedoResearch Unit in Management Sciences and Sustainability (UNICES), University of Maia (UMAIA), 4475-690 Maia, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-8773-3757
Samuel AntunesAPPsyCI-Applied Psychology Research Center Capabilities & Inclusion, ISPA-Instituto Universitário, 1149-041 Lisboa, Portugal.
Joaquim S PintoIETA, Departamento de Eletrónica, Telecomunicações e Informática, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.
Flávio KanazawaErgonomics Laboratory, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, 1499-002 Cruz-Quebrada, Portugal.
Isabel SoutoCIDTFF, Department of Education and Psychology, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.
Elisabeth BritoGOVCOPP, School of Technology and Management of Águeda, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-5504-4332
Carlos F SilvaWJCR, Department of Education and Psychology, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A third version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ III) was developed internationally aiming to respond to new trends in working conditions, theoretical concepts, and international experience. This article aims to present the preliminary validation studies for the Portuguese middle version of COPSOQ III. This is an exploratory cross-sectional study viewing the cross-cultural adaption of COPSOQ III to Portugal, ensuring the contents and face validity and performing field-testing in order to reduce the number of items and to obtain insight into the data structure, through classic test theory and item response theory approaches. The qualitative study encompassed 29 participants and the quantitative one 659 participants from municipalities and healthcare settings. Content analysis suggested that minor re-wording could improve the face validity of items, while a reduced version, with 85 items, shows psychometric stability, achieving good internal consistency in all subscales. The COPSOQ III Portuguese middle version proved to be a valid preliminary version for future validation studies with various populations, able to be used in correlational studies with other dimensions.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPortugalPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesCOPSOQ III Portuguese middle versionpreliminary research versionpsychosocial risk factorspsychosocial working conditionsreliability

Identifiers

PMID35162192
PMCPMC8834667

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.