ArticleGlobal advances in health and medicine2022
Further Examination of the Psychometric Properties of the Current Experiences Scale and Model of Resiliency.
Article in Global advances in health and medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of IN FOCUS: A Mind-Body Resiliency Intervention for Fear of Cancer Recurrence.Psycho-oncology · 2024Trial
- Study protocol for a pilot randomized trial building resiliency among caregivers of cancer curvivors and metavivors.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2025Article
- The Management of Current Stress (MOCS): Reliability and Invariance Testing of Perceived Stress Management Abilities among Patients with Cancer.International journal of stress management · 2025Article
- Development and feasibility of a virtual, synchronous mind-body resiliency intervention for fathers of children and youth with special healthcare needs.Brain behavior and immunity integrative · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Stress-related disease is increasing, with high resilience proposed as protective. Whilst the Current Experiences Scale (CES) shows promise as a measure of resilience, its psychological correlates and relationship to psychological stress remain unclear. Objectives: (1) Further explore the psychometric properties of the CES, (2) identify modifiable psychological factors associated with the CES and (3) test a previously published model for the influence of adaptive strategies and stress management factors on resiliency and stress. Methods: N Results: The CES and its subscales showed good internal consistency (ɑ = .75-.93). The 23-item CES produced excellent results for model fit (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .07, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = .06, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .99; Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = .99). Higher gratitude (P < .0001), mindfulness (P < .0001), positive affect (P < .0001) and coping (P < .0001) were associated with higher resilience. Depression (P = .23) and anxiety (P = .34) were not. A model of resilience which included gratitude, mindfulness, positive affect and coping as determinants of resilience and perceived stress performed well (RMSEA = .03, SRMR = .02, CFI = .99; TLI = .99). Conclusions: The CES was validated in a large sample. The association of gratitude, mindfulness, positive affect and coping with resilience may guide practitioners seeking to design resilience-enhancing programs.
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.