ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Reliability Generalization Meta-Analysis of Internet Gaming Disorder Scale.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cardiology and Neurophysiological Stimulation of Internet Gaming Disorders: A Systematic Review.Current cardiology reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of reliability generalization of Conner-Davison Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-25): A Meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Internet gaming disorder scale: A comparison of symptoms prevalence, structure, and invariance in 12 nationally representative European adolescent samples.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to carry out a reliability generalization meta-analysis of the Internet Gaming Disorder Scale (IGDS) to find out if it presents adequate values that justify its application in its four versions: original and abbreviated with dichotomous or ordinal response. A systematic review including 26 studies that apply this instrument from 2015 to June 2022 was conducted. For each version, a reliability generalization meta-analysis was performed with the random coefficients (RC) and varying coefficients (VC) model. Results showed reliability levels > 0.80 in the ordinal versions (IGDS9P and IGDS27P) and in the dichotomous 27-item version (IGDS27D), while the dichotomous 9-item version (IGDS9D) produced levels > 0.70. High heterogeneity was found in all versions (I2 > 95%; Rb > 90%). Cronbach’s α means with both models (RC-VC) did not differ significantly except for the IGDS9D version. It is concluded that, considering the dependence of the results on sample size, abbreviated versions do not guarantee that reliability remains acceptable, and dichotomous versions may provide limited but acceptable reliability. Finally, IGDS27P version is recommended in contexts where high precision is required.
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.