ArticleBMC nursing2025
Decoding workplace gaslighting: evaluating a Persian version of the gaslighting workplace scale.
Article in BMC nursing, 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.
- Workplace gaslighting in nursing practice: a concept analysis.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Workplace gaslighting: a construct for organizational research.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGaslighting is a form of psychological abuse that undermines individuals' perception of reality through manipulation and often exploits power imbalances in relationships. This phenomenon is prevalent in nursing workplaces, where subtle bullying behaviors persist. This study aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Workplace Gaslighting Scale in nursing context.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted online in 2025 on 306 nurses. The Gaslighting in the Workplace scale was translated using the forward-backward method. Validity (face, content, construct, convergent, and discriminant) and internal consistency were assessed. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using fit indices, while reliability was assessed with Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega. Data analysis was conducted using Amos 26 and Jamovi 2.4.14.
resultsThe two-dimensional model of the scale was tested and confirmed with good fit indices in confirmatory factor analysis: CMIN = 121.627, DF = 53, CMIN/DF = 2.295, CFI = 0.960, TLI = 0.915, SRMR = 0.036, and RMSEA = 0.065. Cronbach's alpha (0.911) and McDonald's omega (0.912) confirmed excellent internal consistency. Most factor loadings were above 0.65, except for items 3 and 4. Convergent validity was partially supported (AVE: 0.434, 0.560; CR > 0.70). Discriminant validity was confirmed (HTMT: 0.695, MSV: 0.425).
conclusionThe Persian version of the Workplace Gaslighting Scale demonstrated strong psychometric properties, including excellent construct validity and internal consistency, confirming its reliability for assessing gaslighting in nursing workplaces.
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.