ArticleNatural hazards (Dordrecht, Netherlands)2023
The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the psychological preparedness for disaster threat scale.
Article in Natural hazards (Dordrecht, Netherlands), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Relationship Between Nurses' Perceptions of Disaster Preparedness and Psychological Preparedness: A Cross-Sectional Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Predictive role of psychological resilience on disaster preparedness among psychiatric nurses: a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Hope, Optimism, and Expectations for the Political Future.Political behavior · 2026Article
- A Community Mental Health Integrated Disaster Preparedness Intervention for Bushfire Recovery in Rural Australian Communities: Protocol for a Multimethods Feasibility and Acceptability Pilot Study.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Development of Flood Preparedness Behavior Scale: A Methodological Validity and Reliability Study.Prehospital and disaster medicine · 2024Article
- Psychological Preparedness of Psychologists during the COVID-19 Emergency: Are There Any Individual Differences?Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the psychological preparedness for disaster threat scale.Natural hazards (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a lockdown preparedness scale: Understanding lockdown preparedness through a social vulnerability perspective.International journal of disaster risk reduction : IJDRR · 2022Article
- The role of healthy emotionality in the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and mental health problems: a cross-sectional study.Cognitive processing · 2022Article
- Developing a healthcare worker psychological preparedness support programme for the COVID-19 outbreak.The South African journal of psychiatry : SAJP : the journal of the Society of Psychiatrists of South Africa · 2022Article
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
The aim of this research was to investigate the validity and reliability of a Turkish version of the 26-item Australian Psychological Preparedness for Disaster Threat Scale (PPDTS). A cross-sectional study involving 530 university students and staff at Giresun University was conducted to establish the psychometric properties of the PPDTS. Content analysis, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis and Cronbach alpha values for reliability were used to analyse the data. Content analysis showed that one item needed to be dropped as it was not related to environmental threats to Turkish communities. The exploratory factor analysis indicated that 66% of the total variance was explained by three factors: (i) knowledge and management of the external situational environment, (ii) management of one's emotional and psychological response, and (iii) management of one's social environment. The confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable overall goodness of fit for the three-factor model: CFI (0.908), RMSEA (0.074) for the 21 item scale. Cronbach's α coefficients of the subscales were 0.91, 0.93, and 0.83, respectively, while for the whole scale, it was 0.95. Four items from the original PPDTS were deleted in the course of the analyses. It was concluded that the Turkish version (PPDTS-T21) is a valid and reliable assessment tool for the evaluation of levels of psychological readiness for disaster threats to Turkish communities and will be useful in policy making for community preparedness for disaster events. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11069-023-06006-w.
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.