ArticlePloS one2025
Re-evaluation of the psychometric properties of ATE following changes in euthanasia regulations in Spain.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Article
- "Healthcare professionals' attitudes towards euthanasia in the Balearic Islands."BMC medical ethics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding healthcare professionals' attitudes toward euthanasia, especially within teams assisting patients who request it, is essential for providing appropriate support throughout the process. The objectives of this study were to re-adapt and validate the Attitude Towards Euthanasia Scale for the Spanish context, to examine its dimensional structure, and to estimate its reliability, particularly in light of the 2021 regulation of euthanasia in Spain. A cross-sectional study was conducted with a non-probabilistic sample of 778 healthcare professionals from the Balearic Health Service. Data collection involved a self-reported sociodemographic questionnaire and the Attitude Towards Euthanasia Scale. The scale's psychometric properties were assessed through reliability and validity tests, including confirmatory factor analysis. The Attitude Towards Euthanasia Scale demonstrated strong reliability, with a Cronbach's alpha of α = 0.889 and item homogeneity ranging from 0.66 to 0.78. Factor loadings were reported for four models, including a unidimensional model and models with two, three, and four factors. The two-factor model explained 64.51% of the variance, with a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value of 0.873. Fit indices indicated good model fit: root mean square residual = 0.040, goodness-of-fit index = 0.960, adjusted goodness-of-fit index = 0.927, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.069. After performing a Parallel Analysis, two loading factor were found. The adapted version of the Attitude Towards Euthanasia Scale, aligned with the current societal and legislative context, is a valid and reliable tool for assessing healthcare professionals' attitudes toward euthanasia, with psychometric properties consistent with the original version.
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.