ArticleBMC public health2025
Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the health belief model scale for colorectal cancer screening.
Article in BMC public health, 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.
- The colorectal cancer screening gap in Türkiye: A tripartite survey of barriers among patients and surgeons.Turkish journal of surgery · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer ranks second among the most prevalent and deadly cancer types for both sexes. Despite having a high mortality rate, colorectal cancer is simultaneously identifiable and preventable through early diagnosis. This study was intended to assess the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Health Belief Model Scale for Colorectal Cancer Screening.
methodsThis methodological study evaluated the 45-item five-point Likert-type Health Belief Model Scale for Colorectal Cancer Screening. Data collection forms were administered via convenience sampling to 649 participants selected from individuals seeking health services at primary healthcare institutions. The scale's reliability and validity were evaluated via item analyses, content and construct validities, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, the Spearman-Brown formula, and test-retest reliability coefficients. The data set was randomly divided into two subsamples. EFA, reliability analyses (Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, Spearman-Brown Coefficient) and item-total statistics were conducted in sample 1 (n = 324). CFA was conducted in sample 2 (n = 325). Item and scale means and, discriminant validity were calculated and tested using the total sample (N = 649).
resultsAccording to the resulting four-dimensional structure, the factor loads of the subscale items were 0.48-0.89, and subscales explained 49% of the total variance. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the subscales were 0.804-0.923. The confirmatory factor analysis revealed good fit indices (χ
conclusionThe Turkish version of the Health Belief Model Scale for Colorectal Cancer Screening is a valid and reliable measuring tool for Turkish people. Except for barrier scale items, those with low means suggest opportunities for improvement. This scale can be applied in Turkey when measuring individuals' health belief perceptions regarding colorectal cancer screening.
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.