Psychometric properties of the American version of the Chronic Uncertainty scale: long and short version (CU-40; CU-20).

Shiwa Ghassabei, Walid A Afifi, Tamara Afifi, Katja Petrowski

Abstract read

In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Shiwa GhassabeiMedical Psychology & Medical Sociology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Duesburgweg 6, 5th, 05317, Mainz, 55128, Germany. sghassab@uni-mainz.de.

Walid A AfifiDepartment of Communication, University of California-Santa Barbara, Santa-Barbara, USA.

Tamara AfifiDepartment of Communication, University of California-Santa Barbara, Santa-Barbara, USA.

Katja PetrowskiMedical Psychology & Medical Sociology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Duesburgweg 6, 5th, 05317, Mainz, 55128, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUncertainty is a widespread phenomenon experienced worldwide. The bulk of existing research to date has focused on transitory or acute experiences of uncertainty, often in the particular context of illness. The current study evaluated the psychometric properties of the cross-contextual 40-item (long) and 20-item (short) Chronic Uncertainty scale (CU-40; CU-20).

methodsA U.S. sample of 1083 participants (55% female) was recruited via Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Exploratory factor analysis revealed a six-factor model.

resultsResults of the Confirmatory factor analysis showed good model fit for the original and a slightly better model fit for the modified version of the CU-40 and CU-20. Slightly different item-to-factor attributions were suggested for the questionnaires. Internal consistencies were good for both models.

conclusionThe evidence suggests that the CU scale offers psychometrically sound assessments of chronic uncertainty across a range of dimensions. Further assessments and implementations of the CU in different contexts using diverse samples are encouraged to test the efficacy of the CU measures as screening tools of general aspects of chronic uncertainty.

Indexed as

PsychometricsAdolescentAdultAgedFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesUncertaintyUnited StatesYoung AdultChronic uncertaintyConfirmatory factor analysisExploratory factor analysisPsychometric properties

Identifiers

PMID39605078

DOI10.1186/s40359-024-02206-6

PMCPMC11603752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.