ArticleInfant mental health journal2025
Validating the parental reflective functioning questionnaire - infant version using a rasch model.
Article in Infant mental health journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Profiles of parental reflective functioning and mind-mindedness in first-time parents of 4-month-old infants.Infant mental health journal · 2025Article
- Validating the parental reflective functioning questionnaire - infant version using a rasch model.Infant mental health journal · 2025Article
- Mentalisation in Parents and Adolescents With Somatic Symptom Disorder: A Cross-Sectional Case-Control Study.Clinical psychology & psychotherapyArticle
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
Parental reflective functioning is the parent's ability to reflect on the psychological processes in their child and in themselves as a parent. Recently, an infant version of the Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire, PRFQ-I, has been developed and validated using confirmatory factor analyses. The present study aims to validate the PRFQ-I using a Rasch model in a sample of 531 Danish mothers at risk of depression and their infants aged 2-11 months. Our findings indicate that seven response categories were too many for the mothers to distinguish across all items. Prementalizing showed adequate psychometric properties, while Certainty of Mental States and Interest and Curiosity required recoding with 4 and 5 as the optimal scores, respectively. After rescoring, both subscales overall showed adequate psychometric properties. However, shortening Certainty of Mental States may be advisable due to local dependency between items 8 and 17. Additionally, items 2 and 14 ("I always know what my child wants" and "I always know why I do what I do to my child") may function better as a separate subscale. We recommend that scores on both Certainty of Mental States and Interest and Curiosity should be analyzed and interpreted in a curvilinear rather than linear manner.
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.