ArticlePloS one2023
Face, content, criterion and construct validity assessment of a newly developed tool to assess and classify work-related stress (TAWS- 16).
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Criterion validity, construct validity, and factor analysis: An introductory overview.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
- Mobile Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback for Work-Related Stress in Employees and the Influence of Instruction Format (Digital or Live) on Training Outcome: A Non-Randomized Controlled Trial.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2025Article
- The Mental Health Literacy and Stigma Scale-Bilingual Cultural Adaptation: Validity and Reliability Pilot Study in Nursing Students.Nursing open · 2025Article
- Translation and Psychometric Validation of Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire: The Urdu Version for Facilitating Multidisciplinary Research in Pakistan.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Levels of work stress among information technology professionals during COVID-19 pandemic in an Indian metropolis.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Experience or perception: What healthcare providers need when using the Utrecht Symptom Diary-4 Dimensional, a mixed-methods study.Palliative care and social practice · 2024Article
- Population-based cohort across stroke life course in India-The NIMHANS-NH-SKAN stroke project: A study protocol.PloS one · 2024Article
- Reliability of a Newly Developed Tool to Assess and Classify Work-related Stress (TAWS-16) for Indian Workforce.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2023Observational
- Work-Related Stress among Healthcare Providers at Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU): A Multicentric Collaborative Study from Karnataka, India.Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicineArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAs work-stress, is associated with Non Communicable Diseases, and decreased work productivity, health and economic benefits are expected from periodic work-stress screening among employees using valid and reliable tools. Tool to Assess and classify Work Stress (TAWS- 16) was developed to overcome limitations in existing work-stress assessment tools in India. This study aims to test face, content, criterion and construct validity of TAWS- 16 in a sample of managerial-supervisory employees.
methodsNine domain experts rated face and content validity of TAWS- 16. Content validity was measured by Content Validity Indices (I-CVI, S-CVI) and Modified Kappa statistics. Empirical validity was tested by analysing data reported from 356 Information Technology (IT) professionals wherein Exploratory Factor Analysis was conducted for the assessment of Construct Validity. Self-reported data was collected in an unlinked and anonymous manner using a web-link, which was emailed to the study subjects, after initial introductory telephone or personal conversation. Criterion Validity was tested against stress sub-scale of DASS- 21. This study was approved by NIMHANS ethics committee.
resultsFindings revealed that TAWS- 16 has good face validity. The content validity is acceptable (CVI = 0.829). Construct Validity is appropriate as 60.8% of the total variance was explained by the factors identified in our study. Criterion Validity was moderate (Kappa Value 0.208) due to inappropriate work-stress instrument for comparison with TAWS- 16.
conclusionsOverall, TAWS- 16 demonstrated good face, content and construct validity. It measures work-stressors, coping abilities and psycho-somatic symptoms associated with work-stress. We recommend use of TAWS- 16 for periodic screening and classification of work-stress among employees.
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.