ArticleScientific reports2026
Cross cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the Persian version of a scale measuring perception of workplace gender discrimination among women nurses.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Workplace gender discrimination against female nurses is a critical issue requiring evidence-based investigation and documentation. This study aimed to validate the Persian version of the Scale to Measure the Perception of Workplace Gender Discrimination for Female Nurses and ensure its psychometric robustness for clinical and research applications. Employing a cross-sectional methodological design, the study recruited 535 female nurses in Iran through convenience sampling. The Persian translation of the scale was developed in accordance with World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. Validity and reliability were assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and internal consistency measures. The EFA and CFA confirmed a five-factor structure with 29 items, accounting for 51.029% of the total variance. Model fit was excellent, as indicated by CFI, GFI, TLI, RMSEA, and SRMR values. The scale exhibited acceptable internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's ω coefficients of 0.905 and 0.916, respectively. These findings establish the Persian version of the scale as a valid and reliable instrument, addressing a significant gap in the assessment of workplace gender discrimination for female nurses.
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.