ArticleEnvironmental health and preventive medicine2025
Validation and cultural adaptation of the Japanese version of the Self-Care Inventory across different research settings: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Environmental health and preventive medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSelf-care is increasingly recognized as the foundation of person-centered healthcare and a key driver for simultaneously improving population health outcomes and reducing healthcare expenditures. While the Self-Care Inventory (SCI) has been validated in several languages, Japan lacks a standardized instrument for assessing self-care in the general adult population. Moreover, it remains unclear whether the SCI reflects culturally specific self-care behaviors and retains its psychological measurement properties in non-Western contexts. Addressing both aspects, this study aimed to evaluate the Japanese version of the SCI (JSCI) in terms of its psychometric properties and its association with concrete health behaviors.
methodsWe adapted the JSCI following COSMIN guidelines using forward/backward translation, expert review, and cognitive debriefing. Psychometric evaluation was based on two samples: a nationwide web-based survey (n = 504) and a community-based paper survey (n = 75). Structural validity was examined via CFA; internal consistency via Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega; and test-retest reliability via ICCs. Convergent and criterion validity were assessed through correlations with relevant psychological constructs. Measurement invariance and DIF across modes were tested, and associations with five external self-care behaviors were evaluated using AUC.
resultsThe hypothesized three-factor structure of the JSCI was supported across both administration modes (CFI = 0.926-0.942; SRMR < 0.06), although some subscales had elevated RMSEA. Internal consistency was acceptable to high (α = 0.75-0.85; ω = 0.81-0.92). ICCs indicated moderate to good temporal stability. JSCI scores correlated with self-care efficacy and other related constructs, supporting convergent and criterion validity. Configural invariance was confirmed, and no significant DIF was detected across modes. JSCI scores modestly discriminated individuals engaging in concrete self-care behaviors such as physical activity, strength training, Helicobacter pylori testing, and having a regular primary or dental care provider (AUCs = 0.62-0.80).
conclusionsThe JSCI demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and structural validity across diverse research settings. Its observed associations with a range of meaningful self-care behaviors support the scale's ecological and practical relevance in the Japanese context. The JSCI may serve as a reliable tool for evaluating and promoting self-care in both research and population health initiatives.
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.