ArticlePsychiatry investigation2026
Validation of the Korean Version of the Meta-Worry Questionnaire Among the General Population.
Article in Psychiatry investigation, 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
objectiveMeta-worry, defined as worry about worrying, plays a central role in the onset and maintenance of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) within the metacognitive model of anxiety. The Meta-Worry Questionnaire (MWQ) is a self-report scale developed to assess negative metacognitive beliefs about worry. This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the MWQ in a general adult population.
methodsAn online survey was conducted with 600 participants, stratified by sex and age. The MWQ was translated using forward and back-translation. The first 300 responses (Group I) were used for exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and the remaining 300 (Group II) were used for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), item response theory (IRT), and convergent validity. Other measures included the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Metacognition Questionnaire for Insomnia-14, Insomnia Severity Index, and the discrepancy between desired time in bed and desired total sleep time index.
resultsEFA showed a one-factor structure explaining 71.5% of the variance. CFA confirmed good model fit, and measurement invariance was observed across the sexes. The internal consistency was high (α=0.946, ω=0.946), and IRT results indicated strong item discrimination. The MWQ scores were strongly related to anxiety, metacognitive beliefs about insomnia, and insomnia severity.
conclusionThe Korean version of the MWQ is reliable and valid for assessing meta-worry. These findings support its applicability in evaluating metacognitive aspects of anxiety symptoms in Korean populations.
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.