ArticleBMC psychiatry2023
Evaluation the validity and reliability of persian short form of the literacy of suicide scale (LOSS): a methodological study in 2022.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis research was conducted with the aim of evaluating the validity and reliability of Persian short version of the Literacy of Suicide Scale (LOSS) among the general population.
methodsThis methodological study was conducted to evaluate the validity and reliability of Persian short form of LOSS among the general population, using a sample of 1175 participants in Iran, 2022. Participants were entered to study using method of proportional stratified sampling. The validity of Persian short form of LOSS was checked by four measures of validity: qualitative face validity, qualitative content validity, EFA (exploratory of factor analysis), and CFA (confirmatory factor analysis). The measure of reliability of Persian short form of LOSS was checked by three reliability of McDonald omega coefficient, ICC (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient), and Cronbach's alpha coefficient.
resultsBased on the findings of EFA, 4 components with eigenvalues > 1 were extracted and these 4 factors were able to explain 57.96% of variance. In EFA section, only 1 question was deleted due to entry into the non -relevant sub -scale. Based on the results of CFA, all items had the factor loading greater than 0.4 and none of the items were removed at this stage. In CFA, based the results of goodness-of-fit indexes for example: χ2/df = 2.077, NFI: 0.957, IFI = 0.977, RMSEA = 0.030, GFI: 0.988, and PGFI = 0.569, the final mode was approved with 11 items and 4 factors. In this study for all items, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.739, McDonald omega coefficient was 0.753, and ICC was 0.860. Finally, the Persian short form of LOSS was approved with 11 items and four dimensions of signs/ symptoms with 3 questions, the risk factors with 2 questions, treatment/ prevention with 2 questions, and causes/ triggers with 4 questions.
conclusionThe Persian short form of LOSS with 11 items and four subscales is a valid and reliable scale to survey the suicide literacy status in the general population.
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.