ArticleNoro psikiyatri arsivi2022
The Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Meta-Worry Questionnaire.
Article in Noro psikiyatri arsivi, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Validation of the Korean Version of the Meta-Worry Questionnaire Among the General Population.Psychiatry investigation · 2026Article
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
Introduction: This study aims to investigate the validity and reliability of the Meta-Worry Questionnaire in the Turkish version as a contribution to clinical practice. Method: The research sample consisted of two groups. Cases were people who have General Anxiety Disorder (n=165) and controls were age and sex-matched healthy volunteers (n=158). To evaluate the psychometric properties of the scale, Meta-Worry Questionnaire, Metacognition Questionnaire-30, Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Penn State Worry Questionnaire and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Questionnaire were used. Results: In this study, Cronbach's alpha coefficient values of frequency and belief components were found 0.92 and 0.94, respectively. At the same time, excluding each item, Cronbach's alpha coefficient values of these two components also remained above 0.90, regardless of which item was chosen. While the frequency component accounted for 69.07% of the total variance, the belief component accounted for 72.95%. The area under the ROC curve is 0.948 for the frequency component and 0.944 for the belief component. The construct validity of the scale was tested with Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis and the one-dimensional structure of the scale was shown. To evaluate the psychometric properties of the scale, other scales which are related to metacognition were used. Conclusion: All items in the tool displayed a high correlation with the overall questionnaire. High total variance of the scale indicates its high validity. These results suggest high reliability of the tool as well as consistency of every item it includes.
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.