Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35719542›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2022

Evaluation of Psychometric Properties of Hardiness Scales: A Systematic Review.

Hamid Sharif Nia, Erika Sivarajan Froelicher, Lida Hosseini, Mansoureh Ashghali Farahani

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Psychosocial correlates of flourishing in the late lifespan.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

4 authors.

Hamid Sharif NiaSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
Erika Sivarajan FroelicherDepartment of Physiological Nursing, School of Nursing, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Lida HosseiniSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mansoureh Ashghali FarahaniSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Hardiness is one of the personality traits that can help individuals in stressful situations. Since human beings are constantly under stressful situations and the stresses inflicted on people in each situation are different, various scales have been developed for assessing this feature among different people in different situations. Hence, it becomes necessary for researchers and health workers to assess this concept with valid and reliable scales. This systematic review aims to rigorously assess the methodological quality and psychometric properties of hardiness scales. Method: In the first step, the databases including Scopus, PubMed, Web of science, and Persian databases were searched using suitable keywords without limitation time. We select eligible suitable studies after screening titles and abstracts. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist and the Terwee quality criteria. Result: Of the 747 articles identified, 33 articles were entered in this study. Based on the COSMIN checklist, the most reported properties were as following structural validity (84%), hypothesis testing (56%), content validity (42%), and internal consistency (39%). Furthermore, 12 studies reported cross-cultural validity, three studies criterion validity, and one study reported measurement error. Conclusion: The "family caregivers' hardiness scale," "Japanese Athletic Hardiness Scale," "Occupational Hardiness Questionnaire," and "Children's Hardiness Scale" are the best tools for assessing hardiness in family caregivers, athletes, employees, and children respectively. In addition, the "Dispositional Resilience Scale" (DRS-15) and The Personal Views Survey (PVS III-R) are the most frequently used scales with suitable features for measuring hardiness in the general population.

Indexed as

hardinesshardy personalitypsychometric testingreliabilitysystematic reviewvalidation studiesvalidity

Identifiers

PMID35719542
PMCPMC9199987

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.