ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Walsh Family Resilience Questionnaire among community-dwelling disabled elderly individuals (WFRQ-CE).
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social isolation profiles and conditional process analysis among postoperative enterostomy patients with colorectal cancer.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Using a Mixed-Method Approach to Explore the Factors Influencing the Family Resilience of Stroke Survivors in China.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To test the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Walsh Family Resilience Questionnaire among community-dwelling disabled elderly individuals (WFRQ-CE). Methods: Convenience sampling was used to select 566 dyads of disabled elderly individuals and their caregivers. The Walsh Family Resilience Questionnaire Chinese Version (WFRQ-C) was tested among elderly individuals. The Family Care Capacity Scale for Elderly Patients (FCCSE) was used as a concurrent validation tool for the caregivers, and the Psychological Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10), and the Social Support Assessment (SSRS-10) were used as concurrent validation tools for both the elderly individuals and the caregivers. Results: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) revealed four common factors-"Family belief," "Organization and problem solving," "Family communication," and "Utilization of external resources"-with a cumulative variance contribution rate of 56.94%. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) yielded the following fit indices: chi-square/freedom degree (χ2/df) = 2.007, Tucker Lewis index (TLI) = 0.900, incremental fit index (IFI) = 0.917, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.916, parsimony goodness-of-fit index (PGFI) = 0.681, and root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.060. The concurrent scales were significantly correlated with the WFRQ-C total score and the scores for each factor ( Conclusion: The WFRQ-CE has good reliability and validity among community-dwelling disabled elderly individuals and can be used to evaluate the level of family resilience.
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.