ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2022
Validity and reliability of the Persian version of the exercise self-efficacy scale in people with multiple sclerosis.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the effects of microlearning and webinars on knowledge and self-efficacy of emergency medical technicians (EMTs) in the diagnosis and treatment of cardiac arrhythmias.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Trial
- Measuring Self-Efficacy for Exercise among Older Adults: Psychometric Properties and Measurement Invariance of a Brief Version of the Self-Efficacy for Exercise (SEE) Scale.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExercise self-efficacy has been identified as one of the primary determinants of physical activity in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Therefore, assessment of exercise self-efficacy is important to be measured with valid and reliable scale to provide tailored interventions. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe English version of the exercise self-efficacy scale was translated into Persian using a forward-backward translation approach. Factorial validity was conducted using the expletory factor analysis (EFA) and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). In addition, construct validity was performed using convergent and known-group validity. Reliability was evaluated by internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Participants were recruited from two hospitals (MS clinics).
resultsExpletory factor analysis identified a single factor structure which explained 64.7% variance in exercise self-efficacy scale (EXSE). CFA supported a single factor structure with a good model fit. Average variance extracted = 0.60 and composite reliability = 0.93 values confirmed the convergent validity. The known-group validity was verified with significant differences between subgroups. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.93 and intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.85 supported reliability of EXSE scale.
conclusionsOur findings provided sufficient evidence of validity and reliability for EXSE scale in people with MS. This measure can utilize by researchers and health-care providers in studies and clinical practice as a robust measure to assess exercise self-efficacy and to develop interventions in people with MS.
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.