ArticleBMC public health2024
Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the contraceptive knowledge assessment scale in college students.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Sexual and reproductive empowerment scale for adolescents and young adults: a psychometric analysis among Chinese college students.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Gatos Clinical Test questionnaire in patients with severe dementia.Frontiers in psychology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo translate and revise the Contraceptive Knowledge Assessment (CKA) scale and apply it to Chinese college male/female students. After cross-cultural adjustment of the source scale, the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the scale were tested. STUDY
designThis study utilized a cross-sectional research design. Translation, cognitive interviews and a psychometric evaluation were carried out. A survey was then conducted among 388 college students in Shanghai to test the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the CKA scale.
resultsThere were 22 items in the Chinese version. Factor analysis extracted 8 common factors, with a cumulative contribution rate of 58.923%, and 3 items were eliminated. The Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.793, and the test-retest reliability Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.743.
conclusionThe Chinese version of the CKA scale has good reliability and validity and is suitable for assessing the level of contraceptive knowledge.
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.