ArticleClinical interventions in aging2026
Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Version of the Brief Resilience Scale in Older Adults with Chronic Illness: A Rasch Analysis.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the internal construct validity of the Chinese version of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) among older adults with chronic illness. Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 223 Chinese older adults with chronic illness. Rasch analysis using the Partial Credit Model was applied. Results: The BRS demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.78). Most items showed satisfactory fit to the Rasch model, providing partial support for internal construct validity. No meaningful DIF by sex was detected. Conclusion: The Chinese BRS showed acceptable internal consistency and generally adequate item fit in older adults with chronic illness. However, poor person-item targeting, ceiling effects, and unstable estimates for some items limited measurement precision and prevented robust assessment of unidimensionality. Further refinement is needed before routine use as a standalone resilience measure in this 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.