ArticleBMC psychology2025
Evaluation of the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the refugee post-migration stress scale.
Article in BMC psychology, 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
backgroundRefugees usually face stressful events both in the destination country and during migration. To date, no tool has been designed to reflect the post-migration stress of Persian-speaking refugees on the basis of their current life conditions. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine the psychometric characteristics of the Persian version of the Refugee Post-migration Stress Scale (RPMS). METHODOLOGY: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2022 with 355 Iranian refugees in Turkey. The original RPMS includes 21 items and 7 subscales. First, the original version of the tool was translated into Farsi via the standard forward-backward method. The instrument's validity was checked through face validity, content validity, and construct validity via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and convergent validity with the World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index (WHO-5) and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 25 (HSCL-25(. Reliability was evaluated via the internal consistency method (Cronbach's alpha). SPSS version 16 and LISREL version 8.8 software packages were used for data analysis.
resultsFace validity and content validity were confirmed by refugees and experts with slight changes. CFA revealed that the proposed 7-subscale model of the original RPMS has a good fit (RMSEA: 0.08, NFI: 0.92; CFI: 0.95; IFI: 0.95; GFI 0.86; SRMR: 0.06). The convergent validity results also showed that the studied instrument has a suitable structure. Convergent validity was confirmed via the Pearson correlation results between the RPMS and two instruments: the HSCL-25 (p < 0.001, r = 0.33) and the WHO-5 (p < 0.001, r= -0.30). Additionally, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.88.
conclusionAccording to the psychometric results of the tool in the Persian-speaking refugee population, the tool is appropriate for measuring post-migration stress in refugees. Another advantage of this tool is its brevity and shortness.
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.