Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36611427›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Measuring Impairments of Mentalization with the 15-Item Mentalization Questionnaire (MZQ) and Introducing the MZQ-6 Short Scale: Reliability, Validity and Norm Values Based on a Representative Sample of the German Population.

David Riedl, Hanna Kampling, Tobias Nolte, Astrid Lampe, Manfred E Beutel, Elmar Brähler, Johannes Kruse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors.

David RiedlLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Rehabilitation Research, 1100 Vienna, Austria.
Hanna KamplingDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Justus Liebig University Giessen, 35390 Giessen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5213-0179
Tobias NolteWellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK.
Astrid LampeLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Rehabilitation Research, 1100 Vienna, Austria.
Manfred E BeutelDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 55122 Mainz, Germany.
Elmar BrählerDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 55122 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2648-2728
Johannes KruseDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Justus Liebig University Giessen, 35390 Giessen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deficits in mentalization are indicated by impaired emotional awareness and self-reflectiveness, and are associated with various mental disorders. However, there is a lack of validated research instruments. In this study, the psychometric properties of the Mentalization Questionnaire (MZQ) were evaluated in a representative German population sample with n = 2487 participants. Analyses included evaluation of the MZQs acceptance, reliability, and validity. Factorial validity was established with exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) after the dataset was randomly split. Dimensionality was evaluated with a bi-factor model. For convergent validity, correlations with the OPD SQS, PHQ-4, and POMS were calculated. While acceptance was good, internal consistencies (ω = 0.65-0.79) and factor structure of the original four subscales were not acceptable (TLI = 0.87, CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.071). EFA indicated a 3-factor solution, which was not confirmed by CFA (TLI = 0.89, CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.073). Correlations between subscales and bi-factor analyses indicated an underlying general factor (TLI = 0.94, CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.053). A shortened 6-item version was comparable to the original scale. Age and sex-specific representative norm-values are presented. The MZQ is a feasible, reliable and valid self-report instrument to measure representations of inner mental states. However, when applied to non-clinical samples, the total score of the MZQ should be used.

Indexed as

mental disordersmentalizationMZQnorm valuesreliabilityvalidity

Identifiers

PMID36611427
PMCPMC9818984

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.