ArticleMedical science educator2025
Translating and Validating the Japanese Version of the Tolerance for Ambiguity Scale.
Article in Medical science educator, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Differences in Capacity for Wonder and Tolerance for Ambiguity by High School of Origin.JMA journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ambiguity is inherent in medicine, and tolerance for ambiguity (TFA) has recently been of substantial interest. Effective medical education for TFA requires a validated inventory; one validated measure in wide use is the seven-item TFA scale. In Japan, however, a tool for measuring TFA in undergraduate medical education has not been available. Here, we aimed to develop and validate the Japanese version of the TFA scale (J-TFA scale). Methods: We translated the original English scale into Japanese following an international guideline. We then conducted a validation survey by distributing an online anonymous self-administered questionnaire to medical students at three medical schools in Japan. We assessed the structural validity and internal reliability of consistency of the scale. Results: A total of 399 participants were included in our analysis. We used a split-half validation approach, with exploratory factor analysis (EFA) on the first half and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the second. EFA indicated a two-factor structure. CFA showed that the two-factor structure suggested by EFA had acceptable model fitness indices. Cronbach's alpha was 0.72, exceeding the satisfactory internal reliability consistency criteria. Conclusions: The J-TFA scale was developed and its psychometric properties were confirmed. This instrument may be useful for future educational interventions and research on TFA.
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.