ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Perceived self-efficacy on advance care planning in Latin America: ACP-SEs Latam validation.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Advance Care Planning is a fundamental process in palliative and person-centered care, as it promotes clinical decisions that align with patients' values and preferences. However, in Latin America no regionally validated instruments were available to measure professional self-efficacy in this domain although a locally validated Argentinian version is available. Objective: The objective of this study was to conduct a multicenter cross-cultural validation of the Perceived Self-Efficacy in Advance Care Planning Scale (ACP-SEsAR) among Latin American healthcare professionals, ensuring its cultural relevance and psychometric robustness. Methodology: An exploratory instrumental study was carried out with 685 healthcare professionals from 18 Spanish-speaking Latin American countries. Linguistic and cultural adaptation followed the International Test Commission guidelines. Twenty-one experts from 12 countries evaluated item clarity, coherence, sufficiency, and relevance using the Content Validity Coefficient (CVC). Reliability and construct validity were analyzed using Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, and exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Results: The analyses demonstrated the scale's strength and consistency in the Latin American context. The expert panel showed excellent agreement (CVC = 0.895). The scale exhibited high internal consistency ( Conclusion: The Latin American version, termed ACP-SEs Latam, demonstrated excellent validity, reliability, and cultural adequacy, consolidating its role as an essential tool for strengthening professional training, evaluating interventions, and informing person-centered health policies.
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.