ArticlePloS one2025
The validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale (SCLC) for pharmacy technicians.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale (SCLC) is widely used to measure satisfaction and self-confidence in learning. The 13-item scale includes two subscales: satisfaction with education (5 items) and self-confidence in learning (8 items), rated on a 5-point Likert scale. However, no validated Dutch version existed for pharmacy technicians, a group increasingly involved in complex healthcare roles. This study aimed to translate, adapt, and validate the SCLC for use among Dutch pharmacy technicians.
methodsThe SCLC was translated into Dutch following cross-cultural adaptation guidelines, including forward and back-translation by three bilingual experts. The questionnaire was administered to pharmacy technicians at Erasmus MC. Internal consistency was assessed using Composite Reliability (CR) and Average Variance Extracted (AVE). A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) evaluated construct validity.
resultsA total of 129 pharmacy technicians completed the questionnaire. CFA indicated a good fit for a two-factor model, with a statistically significant Chi-square (p < 0.000), and a Chi-square/df ratio of 2.5. Fit indices, including CFI (0.92) and RMSEA (0.102), suggested moderate model fit.
conclusionThis study suggests that the Dutch version of the SCLC is a moderately reliable and valid tool for assessing pharmacy technicians' satisfaction with education and self-confidence in learning. Given the absence of other validated instruments in this context, this scale offers a useful starting point for evaluating and improving educational programs. However, as the psychometric properties indicated room for improvement and the model fit was moderate, further research with larger samples is needed to refine and confirm the suitability of this questionnaire.
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.