ArticlePsychology research and behavior management2025
Metacognitions in Young and Middle-Aged Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Psychometric Study of the Metacognitions Questionnaire-30.
Article in Psychology research and behavior management, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The study aimed to conduct a psychometric validation of the Chinese version of the Metacognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30) and to explore the association between metacognitive factors and post-traumatic growth (PTG). Methods: 313 young and middle-aged patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) were recruited between October 2023 and June 2024 from a tertiary hospital in Zhengzhou, China. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test established factor structures of the MCQ-30. The reliability tests, criterion-related validity analyses, and regression models were conducted. Results: CFA results supported the five-factor structure of the MCQ-30, with satisfactory model fit and good reliability. Criterion-related validity was also supported by significant positive correlations between the five factors and depression/anxiety symptoms. All five metacognition factors were also significantly correlated with PTG. Conclusion: The findings support the use of the Chinese version of the MCQ-30 as a potentially reliable and valid instrument for assessing metacognitive beliefs in young and middle-aged AMI patients. Given the sampling method and cross-sectional design, results should be interpreted cautiously. Further research with larger sample sizes, and longitudinal design is needed to validate the above results.
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.