ArticlePsychiatry investigation2026
Psychometric Properties of the Korean Version of the Glasgow Sleep Effort Scale in the General Population and Among Individuals Reporting Insomnia.
Article in Psychiatry investigation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of Sleep medications MYTH-understanding (SMYTH) and Sleep Medications Overexpectation of REsponses (SMORE) among the general population.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to explore the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Glasgow Sleep Effort Scale (GSES) using item response theory among both the general population and individuals who report insomnia.
methodsWe aimed to collect 300 individuals from the general population for Study I and 600 from the general population complaining of insomnia for Study II. Psychometric properties of the GSES were assessed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory. Convergent validity was examined with the Insomnia Severity Index, Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitudes about Sleep-6, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, sleep indices, and the discrepancy between desired time in bed and desired total sleep time index.
resultsA total of 208 participants from Study I and 477 from Study II were ultimately analyzed. CFA for the single-factor model of the GSES showed a good fit in both Study I (comparative fit index [CFI]=0.986, Tucker-Lewis index [TLI]=0.980, root-mean-square error of approximation [RMSEA]=0.066, standardized root-mean-square residual [SRMR]=0.043) and Study II (CFI=0.990, TLI=0.986, RMSEA=0.081, SRMR=0.057). The GSES demonstrated strong psychometric properties under both the Rasch and graded response models, with good item fit, high reliability, and effective discrimination across a range of ability levels. Some items provided limited information, indicating that future validation should explore underutilized response categories and include more diverse samples. The GSES was significantly correlated with other rating scales in both Studies I and II.
conclusionThe Korean version of the GSES is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing individuals' anticipatory concerns regarding sleep.
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.