ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
COPSOQ III in China: Preliminary Validation of an International Instrument to Measure Psychosocial Work Factors.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Psychometric validation of the Czech Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ III): long, middle, and screening versions in a nationwide sample.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Impact of Psychosocial Factors on Mental Health and Turnover Intention Among Health Workers at Different Occupational Statuses: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study in China.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) is an international instrument designed for the assessment and improvement of psychosocial conditions in workplaces and for research purposes. After the International COPSOQ Network took over responsibility for the development of COPSOQ, a new version was published in 2019 (COPSOQ III). However, there is no widely recognized instrument for measuring psychosocial work factors, and insufficient research exists regarding the use of COPSOQ III within the Chinese setting. This study seeks to conduct a preliminary validation of the Chinese long version of COPSOQ III.
methodsA cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted with a large sample in a medical consortium in China. Item analysis, reliability, and validity were explored.
resultsThe data management platform showed that 1067 respondents who met the inclusion criteria completed the questionnaire, among which 1054 questionnaires were valid. The content validity results showed that the I-CVI and S-CVI/AVE of each item ranged from 42.86 to 100.00, and the S-CVI/AVE was 92.52, indicating that the Chinese long version of COPSOQ III had good content validity. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) extracted seven factors, which explained 63.96% of the variation. The results of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that the model was well fit (χ
conclusionsThe Chinese long version of COPSOQ III is of good reliability and validity, like the original, and can be used to assess psychosocial work factors in China.
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.