Trial reportThe journal of spinal cord medicine2025
Exploratory examination of the scale structure of the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale: Application of Rasch Measurement Theory.
Trial report in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveExploratory application of the Rasch Measurement (RM) Model for evidence for reproducibility, conceptual/content validity, and structural validity of the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale (MSES). STUDY
designSecondary RM analysis of data collected in a randomized controlled trial comparing two exercise interventions for persons living with spinal cord injury (SCI).
settingCommunity-dwelling persons living with SCI enrolled in an exercise study.
participantsAdults (
interventionsNot applicable. OUTCOME MEASURE: The original MSES is a 16-item measure of self-efficacy with a 7-level response scale for un/certainty which was developed for use with persons living with SCI.
resultsWe addressed item misfit, infrequent category endorsement, and category step disorder by removing two items and reorganizing the rating scale. Rating scale changes removed category 4 (Neutral), combined categories 1-3 (Very Uncertain, Somewhat Uncertain, and Uncertain) for all items, and further combined certainty categories for two items. Principal components analysis of the residuals indicated a possible second dimension with a first-contrast Eigenvalue of 2.4. However, the contrasted item groups had explained variance <10% and a dis-attenuated correlation = 0.92 indicating they measure the same underlying trait. The small sample size precluded examination of differential item functioning.
conclusionsExploratory RM analysis of MSES produced a 14-item Rasch version which identified structural and content validity evidence concerns inherent in the original MSES. However, results could be biased by a small sample size and further study should examine the item content and rating scale structure with larger, more diverse samples of persons living with SCI.
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.