ArticleJournal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID2025
Psychometric Properties of the Questionnaire Epistemic Trust in People With Mild to Moderate Intellectual Disabilities or Borderline Intellectual Functioning.
Article in Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID, 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.
- Psychometric Properties of the Questionnaire Epistemic Trust in People With Mild to Moderate Intellectual Disabilities or Borderline Intellectual Functioning.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo assess epistemic trust in people with intellectual disabilities, we adapted the Questionnaire Epistemic Trust (QET) for people with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning (MMID/BIF).
methodWe investigated the factor structure, the reliability and construct validity in 147 adults.
resultsWe replicated the 4-factor structure, after excluding four items with low factor loadings. Internal consistency was α = 0.58 for Hypervigilance, and ranged from α = 0.74 to 0.81 for the other subscales. Subscale test-retest reliability ranged from 0.504 to 0.747. No convergent validity was found with the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ). Discriminant validity was confirmed with the Scale of Emotional Development-Questionnaire (SED-Q), Scale of Emotional Development-Short (SED-S) and Autism Spectrum Quotient-10 (AQ-10), but not with General Social Trust (GST). DISCUSSION: The QET is promising for assessing epistemic trust of people with MMID/BIF at subscale level. Refining the items with a figurative expression seems needed.
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.