ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the cardiac distress inventory in Iranian patients with heart disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Italian Adaptation and Psychometric Validation of the Cardiac Distress Inventory in Patients with Recent Cardiac Events.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of a Measure of Psychological Distress After Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: The Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Distress Inventory.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Chinese Version of the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS) in Older Patients with Urinary Incontinence After Prostate Cancer Surgery.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychological distress is common among patients with heart disease, necessitating valid and reliable assessment tools for measuring cardiac distress. The Cardiac Distress Inventory (CDI) has been developed for this purpose, but its psychometric properties require validation in different cultural contexts. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Farsi version of the CDI in an Iranian population with heart disease, focusing on its validity, reliability, and factor structure. A cross-sectional study was conducted from October to December 2024 with 400 adult patients diagnosed with heart disease. Participants were recruited from cardiac departments and clinics using convenience sampling. The CDI was translated into Farsi following WHO guidelines and assessed for face and content validity. Exploratory factor analysis using Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLEFA) with Promax rotation and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted to determine construct validity. Convergent and discriminant validity were examined using average variance extracted (AVE) and heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio, while reliability was assessed via Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, and composite reliability. Measurement invariance across gender groups was also analyzed. The mean age of participants was 42.95 years (SD = 14.02), and 56.8% were women. EFA identified a two-factor structure-Existential and Emotional Distress and Uncertainty and Maladaptive Coping-explaining 69.15% of the variance, with 10 retained items. CFA confirmed the model fit (χ
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.