ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Adaptation and Validation of the Brazilian Portuguese Version of the Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS-BR) in the Context of Primary Health Care.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 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
Abstract
This study aimed to translate the Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS) to Brazilian Portuguese, adapt it to the Brazilian primary health care context, and evaluate its psychometric properties. The adaptation process involved three stages: translation, back-translation, and peer-group evaluation. To achieve a valid and reliable instrument, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the questionnaire (MAKS-BR) was administered through an anonymous, online self-administered questionnaire to a convenience sample of 289 primary care professionals with a mean age of 39.6 years (SD = 9.6 years), 90% of whom were women. The instrument, in its final 11-item model, presented satisfactory fit and comparative indices with a two-factor model. The first factor aggregates items related to mental health knowledge, while the second included items related to recognition and familiarity with various mental health conditions. The network findings support the discriminant validity of the two dimensions, while also underscoring the integrative nature of mental health literacy, in which knowledge and recognition processes are interconnected yet functionally distinct. Our findings suggest that the MAKS is an adequate instrument for assessing mental health knowledge, considering the linguistic and cultural contexts of Brazil.
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.