ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Psychometric Validation of the Romanian Version of the Adult Hope Scale (AHS).
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Stress, Anxiety, and Self-Efficacy in Hypertension: Evidence from a Romanian Case-Control Study.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to adapt and validate the Adult Hope Scale (AHS) for the Romanian population, addressing a gap in culturally appropriate instruments for measuring dispositional hope. Based on Snyder's theoretical model, the AHS was translated, culturally adapted, and administered to 663 Romanian adults. Psychometric evaluation included internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.84 for the eight positively worded items), test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.39 for the full scale), exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, and assessments of convergent and discriminant validity. The two-factor model of the scale (agency and pathways) was confirmed, with significant item loadings and a strong correlation between the two latent factors (r = 0.717). Convergent validity was supported by moderate correlations with the Brief Resilience Scale (r = 0.36-0.45), while discriminant validity was indicated by low correlations with the Trait Anxiety Inventory (r = 0.18-0.20). Demographic analyses revealed higher hope levels in women and engineers, with significant differences by gender (
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.