ArticleBMC geriatrics2025
Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the trust in physician scale in community-dwelling older adults.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundTrust is at the core of the patient-physician relationship. The Trust in Physician Scale (TPS) was specifically developed to measure such interpersonal trust and has high validity and reliability. In this study, we aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the Turkish TPS (TPS-TR) among community-dwelling older adults.
methodsThis prospective study enrolled community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years and older. The TPS-TR and other scales of generalized anxiety disorder-7 scale (GAD-7), and multidimensional trust in health care systems scale (MTHCSS) subscale-1 "trust in health care providers" were administered to all participants. We assessed the internal consistency, item-total correlations, temporal stability, factor analysis, convergent and discriminant validity of TPS-TR.
resultsThe study included 230 individuals. TPS-TR demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.866) and remarkable test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.903). The lowest item-to-total correlation was observed for item 5, with a value of 0.375, which was also considered acceptable (> 0.20). TPS-TR was strongly correlated with the MTHCSS subscale-1 (p < 0.001), suggesting high convergent validity, and showed no correlation with GAD-7 (p = 0.087) indicating adequate discriminative validity.
conclusionThe results of our study showed that the TPS-TR has high reliability and validity in measuring the interpersonal trust of community-dwelling older adults in their physicians. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.