Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36529813›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2022

Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the COVID-19 Phobia Scale.

Yuntian Xie, Ibrahim Arpaci, Yahui Xiao, Fanfei Meng, Ruotong Xie

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yuntian XieDepartment of Applied Psychology, Changsha Normal University, Changsha, China. xieyuntian2008@163.com.
Ibrahim ArpaciDepartment of Software Engineering, Bandirma Onyedi Eylul University, Balikesir, Turkey.
Yahui XiaoDepartment of Applied Psychology, Changsha Normal University, Changsha, China.
Fanfei MengDepartment of Applied Psychology, Changsha Normal University, Changsha, China.
Ruotong XieDepartment of Applied Psychology, Changsha Normal University, Changsha, China.
Changsha Normal University · CNBandırma Onyedi Eylül University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has become a source of fear worldwide and has negative mental health effects on the general population. In 2022, the epidemic continues to be characterized by many points, widespread and frequent in China, and the situation is serious and complex. To provide an effective and scientific tool, the study validated the Chinese version of the COVID-19 Phobia Scale (C19P-SC).

methodsThis study selected 1138 Chinese individuals (age ranged 13 to 80).

resultsCronbach's alpha coefficient for the C19P-SC was 0.93 (the coefficients of the four dimensions ranged from 0.75 to 0.85). The results of the confirmatory factor analysis supported the four-factor structure of the C19P-SC. Meanwhile, there was a positive and significant correlation between coronaphobia and state anxiety (r = 0.48, p < 0.001). The metric invariance hypothesis and the scalar invariance hypothesis were valid in the different subgroups. Significant multivariate effects of gender, education level, and identity differences on coronaphobia were found.

conclusionsThe Chinese version of the COVID-19 Phobia Scale has good psychometric properties and is suitable for measuring COVID-19 phobia in Chinese individuals.

Indexed as

COVID-19Phobic DisordersAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overEast Asian PeopleHumansMiddle AgedPandemicsPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultChineseCoronaphobiaPerceived social supportThe COVID-19 Phobia Scale

Identifiers

PMID36529813
PMCPMC9759676
OpenAlexW4311833218

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.