ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
Validity and Reliability of the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale-Chinese Version.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. 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.
- When Caring Hurts: The Buffering Role of Social Support in Emergency Department Nurses' Coping With Secondary Traumatic Stress.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- The influence of childhood trauma on social media-induced secondary traumatic stress among college students: the chain mediating effect of self-compassion and resilience.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Article
- Compassion fatigue, secondary traumatic stress, and coping strategies of mental health professionals.Industrial psychiatry journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To test the validity and reliability of the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale-Chinese version in clinical nurses. Methods: According to the translation principles of the Brislin Scale, the original scale was translated, back translated and cross-culturally adapted to form the Chinese version of the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale. Nurses in three general hospitals in Changsha, Hunan province were surveyed by convenient sampling method from July 2020 to September 2021. Exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, content validity and criterion validity was used to evaluate the validity of the scale. Internal consistency Cronbach's α coefficient, split-half reliability and test-retest reliability were used to evaluate the reliability of the scale. Results: A total of 678 nurses were included in the study. There were 460 people in sample 1 and 218 people in sample 2. Two common factors were extracted by exploratory factor analysis. The cumulative contribution was 65.560%. The two-factor structure model was good (χ Conclusion: This study identified two components of the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale-Chinese version, which has 2 dimensions and 17 items. With good validity and reliability, it is suitable for the assessment of secondary traumatic stress among clinical nurses in the Chinese context.
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.