ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Cross-sectional psychometric validation, convergent validity, and measurement invariance of the DASS-21 in Mexican university students.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adaptation and Validation of the Social Media Cyberbullying Victimization Scale Among Chinese College Students: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Psychometric comparison of five short forms of the DASS in Mexican university students: implications for emotional distress screening.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
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
Objective: To evaluate the factor structure, reliability, and gender invariance of the DASS-21, and to examine convergent/criterion-related evidence with coping and functional impairment. Design: Cross-sectional, single-site psychometric validation in first-year undergraduates at a private Mexican university; multigroup CFA with ordinal/WLSMV; proctored digital administration; convergent/criterion analyses and known-groups tests. Methods: First-year students ( Results: The three-factor model showed acceptable fit (CFI=0.99; RMSEA=0.07). Hierarchical/bifactor solutions improved representation; bifactor indices (ECV=0.81; ωh=0.88) supported a predominant general factor. Reliability was good-excellent (ωsubscales≈0.85-0.88; ωtotal≈0.94). Configural, metric, and scalar (threshold) invariance held (ΔCFI≤0.01; ΔRMSEA≤0.015). Latent means indicated higher Stress and Anxiety in women (small effects), with no difference in Depression. DASS-21 scores correlated negatively with adaptive coping and positively with avoidant coping; higher scores were observed among students reporting prior diagnosis and recent functional impairment. Conclusion: Evidence supports the validity, reliability, and fairness of the DASS-21 for screening general distress and profiling subdomains in Mexican universities; priorities include norms and ROC-based cutoffs in verified clinical samples. Limitations: Single-site, non-probabilistic sample; cross-sectional design; clinical status by self-report; forced-completion digital setting may introduce minor response pressure.
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.