ArticleHealth psychology and behavioral medicine2026
Translation and psychometric validation of the symptom catastrophizing scale in cardiac surgery patients: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Health psychology and behavioral 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: Symptom catastrophizing reflects maladaptive cognitive and emotional responses to physical symptoms and may worsen symptom burden, distress, and recovery. However, no validated Chinese instrument is available for cardiac surgery patients, limiting patient-centered assessment and early risk identification. Objective: To translate and culturally adapt a symptom-neutral catastrophizing measure derived from the original Post-concussion Symptom Catastrophizing Scale and evaluate its psychometric properties in Chinese cardiac surgery patients. Methods: Following Brislin's translation model, the scale was translated into Chinese. A convenience sample of 676 cardiac surgery patients was recruited from June to October 2025. Item analysis included critical ratio testing, item-total correlations, and internal consistency evaluation. Reliability was assessed using internal consistency, split-half, and test-retest methods. Content validity was evaluated through expert consultation. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to examine construct validity. Data were analyzed using SPSS 29.0 and Mplus 8.0. Results: The adapted Chinese Symptom Catastrophizing Scale demonstrated strong content validity in cardiac surgery patients (S-CVI/Ave = 0.975; CVR = 0.800-1.000). Exploratory factor analysis extracted a three-factor model explaining 79.774% of the variance. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated acceptable model fit (χ Conclusion: The Chinese Symptom Catastrophizing Scale demonstrated satisfactory initial reliability and validity evidence in cardiac surgery patients. It provides a brief, standardized, patient-centered measure for identifying maladaptive symptom responses and may facilitate early psychological risk screening, targeted symptom management, and future patient-reported outcome research.
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.