ArticleBMC psychology2024
Psychometric assessment of a Chinese version of a mindfulness practice quality measurement tool.
Article in BMC psychology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMindfulness training is increasingly popular in China. The challenge of evaluating mindfulness practice objectively and accurately has attracted research attention. However, previous studies in China focused primarily on the quantity rather than the quality of mindfulness training. The Practice Quality - Mindfulness (PQ-M) can provide a solution. Consequently, the present study aimed to validate and assess the internal consistency and construct validity of the Chinese version of the Practice Quality - Mindfulness (Ch-PQ-M) in a non-clinical sample.
methodsOne hundred and sixty participants (female:81) were recruited to practice 20 min of mindfulness training daily for four consecutive days and to complete the Ch-PQ-M, the State Anxiety Inventory, and the Peace of Mind Scale immediately after each mindfulness practice. The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, the Trait Anxiety Inventory, and the Positive and Negative Affect Scale were administered pre- and post- 4-day treatment. Construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis), internal consistency, test-retest reliability, predictive validity and construct validity were examined.
resultsCh-PQ-M demonstrated acceptable internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the established two-factor model (perseverance and receptivity). The Ch-PQ-M attention score was significantly associated with changes of trait anxiety. It improved with short-term mindfulness practice. The perseverance score consistently correlates with scores on peace of mind, state anxiety, trait anxiety, and observe and nonreactivity. The receptivity score remains consistently correlated with the nonjudging. These findings suggest that Ch-PQ-M is a valid instrument for evaluating individual mindfulness quality for a single-session practice.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that Ch-PQ-M (especially for the Ch-PQ-M perseverance score) has acceptable psychometric properties and is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing mindfulness practice quality in the Chinese cultural context.
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.