ArticleBMC psychology2023
Factor structure and psychometric properties of the german version chronic uncertainty scale (CU-20).
Article in BMC 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factor structure and measurement invariance of exercise self-efficacy scale among secondary school students in China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Psychometric properties of the American version of the Chronic Uncertainty scale: long and short version (CU-40; CU-20).BMC psychology · 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 at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe experience of uncertainty is ubiquitous and universal across the globe. Many available tools measuring uncertainty are focused on one aspect of uncertainty, e.g., patients with life-threatening illnesses, hence a measure considering (chronic) uncertainty as an integral experience reflect ongoing uncertainties from a socio-cultural perspective is missing. Additionally, current tools do not account for an extended timeframe to measure chronic forms of uncertainty. The objective of this study is to validate a translated German version of the 20 item Chronic Uncertainty Scale (CU-20).
methodsThe full sample comprised N = 462 participants. Most of the participants were young German citizens and the sex distribution was relatively balanced (60% females; age in average: M = 24.56; SD = 4.78). Using equally split samples, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) evaluated the CU-20 factor structure, followed by a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test the established factor structure. Measurement invariance between male and female groups was evaluated. Internal consistency of the six-factor model was shown and scale discrimination was shown against chronic stress.
resultsThe EFA results showed decent model fit for the five-factor structure, however based on the CFA results, the theoretically established six-factor model fits the data significantly better. Measurement invariance between male and female groups was shown to be clearly scalar invariant. Cronbach's alpha, omega and lambda all support internal consistency and reliability of CU-20.
conclusionsThe CU-20 is a valid and reliable measure of one's state of chronic uncertainty reflecting the individuals' experiences of macrosocial forms of uncertainty, compared to the existing ones. This scale is especially useful in the context of migration, refugees or during global crises. Further psychometric testing is required in more diverse samples and a deeper look into measurement invariance is recommended.
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.