ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Adaptation of Snyder adult dispositional hope scale into Chinese: a cross-sectional study on reliability and validity test in older adults with coronary heart disease.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 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
Abstract
backgroundOlder adults with coronary heart disease (CHD) express hope differently from the general population due to disease progression, physiological decline, and changing social roles. However, hope assessment in China lacks culturally validated tools for this group.
objectiveThis study translated and culturally adapted the Adult Dispositional Hope Scale (ADHS) into Chinese and evaluated its reliability and validity in older adults with CHD.
methodsThe ADHS was translated using the Brislin model. Psychometric properties were evaluated in 473 older adults with CHD recruited via convenience sampling across three rounds.
resultsThe Chinese ADHS comprises 12 items across two dimensions, featuring four non-scored distractor items. Item analysis demonstrated significant inter-group discrimination between high/low scorers (P < 0.001) and robust item-total correlations (P < 0.001), hence affirming discriminant validity. Reliability analyses demonstrated internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.923; split-half reliability = 0.933) and composite reliability meeting thresholds for pathways thinking and agency thinking dimensions. High test-retest r = 0.951, (2-week interval) indicated measurement stability. The content validity was robust (scale-level CVI = 0.938; item-level I-CVI range = 0.786-1.000). Exploratory factor analysis identified two factors that accounted for 78.406% cumulative variance. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated satisfactory model fit (CFI = 0.951, RMSEA = 0.084), supporting structural validity. Convergent validity was evidenced by strong positive correlations with the Herth Hope Index (r = 0.907, P < 0.001), whereas discriminant validity was established via negative correlations with the Geriatric Depression Scale (r = - 0.832, P < 0.001).
conclusionThe Chinese ADHS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing hope in older Chinese CHD adults. However, generalizability is limited by sample homogeneity and contextual factors. Further validation in broader populations is needed.
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.