ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Validity and reliability of a Chinese version of the Bergen Work Addiction Scale.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Age Differences in Factors Associated With Insomnia Severity: A Comparative Study of Questionnaire Scores and Heart Rate Variability Parameters.Depression and anxiety · 2026Article
- The impact of nursing intervention based on teach-back method on self-management behavior and negative emotions of postoperative patients with aortic dissection.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Work addiction (WA), which can impair personal relationships, engagement in recreational activities, and/or health, is a behavioral addiction. A tool for the early detection of WA in China is needed. Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and determine the validity and reliability of a Chinese version of the Bergen Work Addiction Scale (C-BWAS). Methods: Two hundred social workers who provided post-discharge services for adolescents with non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) were enrolled in this study. The construct validity of the C-BWAS was assessed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Criterion validity was assessed by conducting Pearson correlation analyses of C-CWAS scores with Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D) and Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) scores. Cronbach's α and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to evaluate the reliability of the C-BWAS. Results: CFA confirmed a one-dimensional structure of the C-BWAS with good construct validity indices [comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.964, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.951, root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.079, and minimum discrepancy Ĉ/degrees of freedom (Cmin/DF) = 0.362]. The standardized regression weights ranged from 0.523 to 0.753. All C-BWAS items loaded on one major factor (loading weights, 0.646-0.943). Coefficients of correlation between C-BWAS scores and HAM-D and HAM-A scores were 0.889 and 0.933, respectively. The Cronbach's α coefficient and ICC for the instrument was 0.837 and 0.905, respectively. Conclusion: The presently developed C-BWAS showed very good reliability and acceptably validity. It can be employed as a useful tool for assessing WA severity in social workers who provide post-discharge services for adolescents with NSSI.
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.