ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Polish translation and validation of the student satisfaction and self-confidence in learning scale among healthcare students at the Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin: a single-center cross-sectional validation study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Simulation-based education is an established component of healthcare training, yet robust Polish-language instruments for evaluating the learner's reaction to simulation remain scarce. The Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning (SSCL) scale operationalizes the reaction level of educational evaluation within the NLN/Jeffries Simulation Framework. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the Polish version (PL-SZZ) in a single-center, convenience sample of healthcare students and, secondarily, to determine how it should be scored in practice. Methods: This cross-sectional validation study was conducted at the Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin (data collected 2023-2025). Translation followed a five-stage forward-backward protocol with sworn translators and expert adjudication. Students who had participated in simulation classes completed the PL-SZZ anonymously. After screening for extreme observations (1.5 × interquartile range), 827 of 879 questionnaires were analysed. Confirmatory factor analysis (DWLS/WLSMV applied to polychoric correlations) compared a one-factor and a correlated two-factor model. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach's α, McDonald's ω, and marginal reliability (MR); validity via standardized loadings, average variance extracted (AVE), the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio, and added-value analysis. Results: The analytic sample comprised 827 students (86.6% female), predominantly nursing students (64.6%). The correlated two-factor model fitted better than the unidimensional model (χ Conclusion: In this single-center, predominantly female and nursing-dominated sample, the PL-SZZ reproduced the original correlated two-factor structure with acceptable reliability and construct validity. Because the subscales added no incremental precision, the total score is recommended for routine evaluation, with subscale scores reserved for diagnostic and curriculum-development purposes. Findings should not be generalized beyond comparable populations. Further multi-center research is needed before using the instrument for between-group or institutional comparisons.
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.