ArticleSexual medicine2024
Translating and validating the gay affirmative practice scale for nurses in mainland China.
Article in Sexual medicine, 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.
- Factors associated with gay-affirmative practice among polish paramedics: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The gay affirmative practice (GAP) scale is an effective tool for evaluating the beliefs and behaviors of health care professionals toward gay and lesbian clients. Aim: This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the GAP scale among Chinese nurses. Methods: A quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate the Chinese version of the GAP (C-GAP) scale after translation and cross-cultural adaptation and to examine its psychometric characteristics. The reliability and validity of the C-GAP scale were determined by item analysis, factor analysis, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and discriminant construct validity. Outcomes: The GAP scale was translated and adapted specifically for China. A total of 1440 participants completed the C-GAP scale, sociodemographic questionnaire, and Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale. Results: The C-GAP scale exhibited a Cronbach α of 0.95, with a high test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.92. Exploratory factor analysis identified 2 factors that accounted for 59.91% of the total variance. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis were as follows: χ Clinical Implications: The C-GAP scale can be an effective tool for health care professionals and managers and for education and research; it can also identify the beliefs and behaviors of health care professionals toward gay and lesbian clients, facilitating cultural competence development and enhancing care quality awareness and skills. Strengths and Limitations: The C-GAP scale demonstrates reliability and validity; however, because the sample consisted only of nurses, the findings may not be generalizable to other professional groups, such as counselors and therapists. Therefore, the occupational focus of the sample limited the broader applicability of the results. Conclusion: The C-GAP scale is a reliable and valid tool suitable for assessing the practice attitudes and behaviors of Chinese nurses toward gay and lesbian clients.
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.