ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2025
"Coping self-efficacy scale" evaluation of the Turkish validity and reliability of the scale.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The purpose of the study is to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Coping Self-Efficacy Scale (CSES) for family physicians. Method: The study is a correlational cross-sectional type of methodological study conducted with 255 family physicians. In the research, data were collected using descriptive data record form and the CSES. The collected data were analyzed using the following statistical methods: "Explanatory Factor Analysis (EFA)," "Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)," "Cronbach's Alpha." Results: This study involved family physicians (mean age: 38.5 ± 10.1, 59.2% women), with 72.2% married and 59.6% having children. Work settings varied, with 39.2% in family health centers, 38.0% in university hospitals, and 16.5% in state hospitals. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on the CSES, revealing a three-factor model with strong validity (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) =0.956). The model exhibited good fit indices (χ² =61.432, df = 132, Conclusions: Findings affirm the reliability and validity of the CSES instrument in assessing self-efficacy among family physicians, providing a valuable tool for understanding and enhancing their professional capabilities in diverse healthcare settings.
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.