ArticleBMC nursing2023
Investigating discrimination in the workplace. Translation and validation of the Everyday Discrimination Scale for nursing staff in Germany.
Article in BMC nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Racial Discrimination and University Students' Mental Health: a Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
- Everyday discrimination and life satisfaction: Turkish adaptation of the Everyday Discrimination Scale (EDS) and the mediating role of depression.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Layered Injustices: Mapping Everyday Discrimination in Nursing Education through an Intersectional Lens.The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2026Article
- Measuring Perceived Discrimination and Its Consequences for Latino Health.Societies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Interpersonal discrimination experiences in outpatient care are associated with non-adherence - results of a population survey in Germany.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Frequency of interpersonal discrimination experiences - differences between inpatient and outpatient care and associations with delayed and forgone care.International journal for equity in health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Everyday Discrimination Scale (EDS) is a frequently used questionnaire in the field of health and social psychology that aims to explore perceptions of discrimination, especially instances of injustice related to various diversity characteristics. No adaptation to health care staff exists. The present study translates and adapts the EDS to nursing staff in Germany and examines its reliability and factorial validity as well as its measurement equivalence between men and women and different age groups.
methodsThe study was based on an online survey conducted among health care staff of two hospitals and two inpatient care facilities in Germany. The EDS was translated using a forward-backward translation approach. Direct maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the factorial validity of the adapted EDS. Differential item functioning (DIF) related to age and sex was investigated by means of multiple indicators, multiple causes (MIMIC) models.
resultsData on 302 individuals was available, of whom 237 (78.5%) were women. The most commonly employed one-factor, 8-item baseline model of the adapted EDS showed a poor fit (RMSEA = 0.149; CFI = 0.812; TLI = 0.737; SRMR = 0.072). The model fit improved considerably after including three error covariances between items 1 and 2, items 4 and 5, and items 7 and 8 (RMSEA = 0.066; CFI = 0.969; TLI = 0.949; SRMR = 0.036). Item 4 showed DIF related to sex and age, item 6 showed DIF related to age. DIF was moderate in size and did not bias the comparison between men and women or between younger and older employees.
conclusionsThe EDS can be considered a valid instrument for the assessment of discrimination experiences among nursing staff. Given that the questionnaire, similar to other EDS adaptations, may be prone to DIF and also considering that some error covariances need to be parameterized, latent variable modelling should be used for the analysis of the questionnaire.
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.