SynthesisClinical psychology & psychotherapy
Measures of Psychological Mindedness: A Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties.
Synthesis in Clinical psychology & psychotherapy. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePsychological mindedness has been positively associated with psychological wellbeing and positive outcomes in psychological therapy. Valid and reliable measures of psychological mindedness are needed for accurate measurement of the construct. This paper is the first to provide a comprehensive review of existing measures of psychological mindedness.
methodsThe review protocol was pre-registered and systematic with methods reported according to PRISMA criteria. The quality of studies reporting on psychometric properties of measurement tools was evaluated against the COSMIN criteria.
resultsTwenty-three studies relating to six measures of psychological mindedness were included in the review. No measure demonstrated sufficient evidence when evaluated against all COSMIN measurement criteria. However, the Balanced Index of Psychological Mindedness (BIPM) demonstrated the most robust psychometric properties with sufficient evidence of structural validity and internal consistency demonstrated through studies of high quality.
conclusionsWhilst the BIPM demonstrated the most robust measurement properties, further research is needed in relation to its content validity, cross-cultural validity, and responsiveness. The BIPM also does not incorporate 'other-oriented' psychological mindedness. Alternative measures such as the PMS and PMAP are available to measure psychological mindedness towards others but have less sufficient evidence of psychometric rigour.
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.