ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Reliability, validity, and measurement invariance of a Chinese handwriting legibility scale among primary students in central China.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neurocognitive academic training to improve symptoms executive functions and Chinese handwriting in children with ADHD.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chinese handwriting has a close relationship with spatial cognition, and the legibility dimension is prominent with its spatial-oriented characteristics. However, handwriting evaluation focusing on the detailed spatial aspects of the legibility dimension in the Chinese context is rare. Aims and methods: We aimed to develop a Chinese Handwriting Legibility Scale (CHLS) and examine its reliability, validity, and measurement invariance among Chinese primary students of different grades. A total of 684 students aged 8-12 years were recruited from a mainstream primary school in central China and were asked to copy a Chinese template as legibly as possible within 4 min. The developed CHLS was used to assess these students' legibility performance. Results: The seven-criteria CHLS favored content validity. The inter-rater reliability was good; however, the scoring instructions need to be refined. Principal component analysis (PCA) revealed a one-factor solution explaining 62.336% of the variance of the seven-criteria CHLS, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed its appropriateness. There was a high internal consistency ( Conclusion: CHLS may be effective for evaluating Chinese handwriting legibility performance in the Chinese primary school context in the central region. Students' Chinese handwriting legibility performance may have developmental specificity in different grades.
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.