ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the sunlight exposure questionnaire.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlation and risk factor analysis of suicidal behavior in adolescents with depression: the impact of stress and childhood trauma.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to translate and validate the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Philippines Sunlight Exposure Questionnaire. Methods: A total of 392 Chinese individuals aged at least 18 years, residing in various cities in Sichuan province for at least 1 year, were recruited. The reliability of the Chinese version of the questionnaire was measured through internal consistency, split-half reliability, and retest reliability, while validity was determined using the content validity index and the structure validity index. Results: The Chinese version of the Sunlight Exposure Questionnaire, which includes 19 items covering 5 factors, demonstrated McDonald's omega coefficient of 0.788. The split-half reliability of the questionnaire was 0.823, and the retest reliability was 0.940. The content validity index (S-CVI) was 0.952. The five-factor structure, supported by eigenvalues, explained 66.2% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated favorable model fit. Results: The chi-square value degrees of freedom ratio (χ Conclusion: The Chinese version of the Sunlight Exposure Questionnaire shows validity and good reliability for assessing sun exposure among adults in a Chinese cultural context.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.