ArticlePloS one2026
Arabic translation and psychometric validation of the Problem-Solving Decision-Making scale: A cross-sectional study in Saudi Arabia.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Problem-Solving Decision-Making scale was originally developed in English to assess patient preferences across three domains: mortality, morbidity, and quality of life. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and psychrometrically validate an Arabic version of the Problem-Solving Decision-Making scale using a sample of 505 adults from the general Saudi population. The translation followed World Health Organization guidelines for instrument translation and validation. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to examine the underlying factor structure. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, while construct validity was evaluated through average variance extracted and the Fornell-Larcker criterion. Measurement invariance across sex was examined using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis. The Arabic version demonstrated strong psychometric properties. Exploratory factor analysis identified a four-factor structure explaining 56% of the variance, which showed good model fit (χ²/df = 3.22, CFI = 0.991, TLI = 0.990, SRMR = 0.070, RMSEA = 0.081). All factors exhibited satisfactory internal consistency. Convergent and discriminant validity were supported. Measurement invariance was established across sex, and latent mean comparisons indicated that females scored significantly higher than males across all four factors. These findings support the reliability and validity of the Arabic Problem-Solving Decision-Making scale and highlight its suitability for assessing patient involvement preferences in Arab population.
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.