ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2024
Assessment of psychometric performance for the Chinese version of the Brief Inventory of Perceived Stress integrating exploratory graph analysis and confirmatory factor analysis.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2024. 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
Abstract
objectiveThis study was to evaluate measurement properties of the Chinese version of the Brief Inventory of Perceived Stress (BIPS-C) and confirm possible solutions for measuring the constructs underlying perceived stress.
methodsA total of 1356 community residents enrolled and were randomly split into two halves. The first half was used to explore the underlying constructs of the BIPS-C by exploratory graph analysis (EGA) and the second half was used to compare and confirm the constructs by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
resultsThe EGA identified a one-factor model of the BIPS-C with an accuracy of 99.3%. One-factor, three-factor, second-order, and bifactor models were compared by CFAs. The bifactor model with one general and three specific factors was found to be the most adequate [comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.990; Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.979; root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.058] and was superior to the other models. The related bifactor indices showed a stronger existence of the general factor. The bifactor model of the BIPS-C also showed adequate internal consistency with McDonald's omega and omega subscales ranging from moderate to strong (0.677-0.869).
conclusionThe BIPS-C demonstrates sufficient measurement properties for assessing general perceived stress.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39008142What 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.