ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Development and verification of the Korean version of the genetic counseling self-efficacy scale.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. 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.
- Development and verification of the Korean version of the genetic counseling self-efficacy scale.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
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
Abstract
A self-reported Genetic Counseling Self-Efficacy Scale (GCSES) was developed in English to measure genetic counselors' self-efficacy, a factor known to affect their job performance. This study verified the reliability and validity of the GCSES for use in Korea. The scale was translated and back-translated into Korean for cultural fit verification. Expert analysis was performed to ensure content validity. For construct validity, a confirmatory factor analysis of the six-factor structures of the GCSES and an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the K-GCSES were conducted. To confirm the convergent validity and discriminant validity of the items, a multitrait/multi-item matrix analysis of the relationship between items and subscales was conducted. The reliability was evaluated by examining internal consistency and test-retest reliability. A total of 62 participants were recruited from certified genetic counselors associated with the Korean Society of Medical Genetics and Genomics and from four graduate schools offering genetic counseling programs. Confirmatory factor analysis showed an inadequate fit to the original GCSES structure. Through EFA, three-factor structures were identified: "counseling competence and psychosocial skills," "genetic testing," and "information gathering." Of the original 38 GCSES items, five were removed due to low factor loadings and small inter-item correlations. The item convergent validity and discriminant validity of the Korean version of the GCSES were established, and the correlation between the subfactors showed statistical significance (0.711-0.983). Cronbach's alpha was 0.985, and the intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.882 to 0.897, securing reliability. The K-GCSES has a three-factor structure with acceptable reliability and sufficient validity. Differences in the factor structure between the K-GCSES and GCSES may be due to cultural factors. K-GCSES can be used as a tool to evaluate the competence of genetic counselors and genetic counseling students in Korea and to improve the quality of professionalism and education.
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.