ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023
The cognitive adaptability and resiliency employment screener (CARES): tool development and testing.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Assessment of predictive validity of the Cognitive Adaptability and Resiliency Employment Screener (CARES) among content moderators.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Longitudinal comparison of psychological outcomes of professional content moderators engaged in resilience training program.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To decrease psychological risk for content moderators, the study initiated the first steps of developing a robust employment screening tool, namely, the Cognitive Adaptability and Resiliency Employment Screener. Method: The study consisted of three phases with 4,839 total participants. Results: In Phase 1, a set of 76 items were developed and tested via exploratory factor analysis, yielding three factors (i.e., Psychological Perseverance & Agility, Rumination & Emotional Lingering, and Expressiveness & Sociability) and also reducing the scale to 68 items. In Phase 2 through confirmatory factor analysis, the three-factor structure showed good fit (CFI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.05) and demonstrated sufficient overall reliability. In Phase 3, the convergent validity and divergent validity of the tool were established relative to constructs such as resilience, cognitive control and flexibility, emotion regulation, and optimism. Discussion: Altogether, the findings revealed that the scale demonstrated good psychometric properties that, pending future studies, may serve as a promising employment screener for content moderators.
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.