ArticleBMC psychiatry2024
Self-concealment scale (SCS) in middle-aged people: psychometric features and cross-age equivalence test.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2024. 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.
- Measurement Invariance and Psychometric Properties of the Self-Concealment Scale in Iran.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals' concealment of negative information and privacy may lead to impaired social interactions and threatened health conditions. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the Self-Concealment Scale (SCS) in the middle-aged Chinese population and to examine the equivalence of the SCS among different age groups.
methodsThe current research adopted the SCS, Distress Disclosure Index (DDI), Revised Cheek and Buss Shyness Scale (RCBS), Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS), Social Phobia Scale (SPS), UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8), and Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) to survey 1124 middle-aged people. To explore the factor structure of the SCS, the study employed exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. The reliability of the SCS was measured based on Cronbach's α coefficients, McDonald's Omega coefficients, and split-half reliability. Correlation analysis was applied to examine the relationship between SCS and RCBS, SIAS, SPS, ULS-8, and K10. Moreover, this study recruited 1458 emerging adults and 1104 older adults to identify the cross-age invariance of the SCS.
resultsExploratory factor analysis of the middle aged adults' data supported a single factor model. The factor loadings of SCS items ranged from 0.62 to 0.73, the commonality ranged from 0.39 to 0.53, and the single-factor model fitted well. The scale showed a Cronbach's α coefficient value of 0.895, McDonald's Omega coefficient of 0.893, and a split-half reliability coefficient value of 0.861. In addition, the SCS demonstrated invariance in emerging adults, middle-aged adults, and older adults. Further analysis showed that the scores of the SCS (F = 3.55, p = 0.029) among emerging adults (M = 26.43, SD = 7.96) were significantly higher than among middle-aged (M = 25.77, SD = 7.79), and older cohort (M = 25.69, SD = 7.91).
conclusionThe SCS revealed favorable psychometric characteristics among the middle-aged Chinese population. The degree of self-concealment among emerging adults was higher than that of middle-aged and older people.
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.