Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39334458›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2024

New norm values of the brief resilience scale (BRS) from the German general population with new post-COVID-19 data.

Christoph Rösner, Elmar Brähler, Cedric Sachser, Vera Clemens, Katja Petrowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Christoph RösnerMedical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Elmar BrählerDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Str. 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Cedric SachserDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Psychotherapy, Ulm University, Steinhövelstrasse 5, 89073, Ulm, Germany.
Vera Clemens *Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Psychotherapy, Ulm University, Steinhövelstrasse 5, 89073, Ulm, Germany.
Katja Petrowski *Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany. kpetrows@uni-mainz.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe concept of psychological resilience has spurred extensive research across various fields, with the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) emerging as a concise tool to measure an individual's ability to rebound from stress. It has been translated into multiple languages, including German, but the validation of the German version occurred prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to examine new norm values and psychometric properties of the BRS.

methodsNorm values, the factor structure, reliability and validity of the BRS were examined using data from a representative survey of the German general population (N = 2522).

resultsThe results indicated that the method-factor model showed the best fit, suggesting a nuanced understanding of resilience beyond a single-factor approach. The BRS demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity based on both latent and manifest correlations. Moreover, the study revealed increasing postpandemic resilience scores.

conclusionsThe results of this study provide support for the psychometric reliability and validity of the German version of the BRS after the COVID-19 pandemic and underscore the importance of assessing resilience amidst evolving societal challenges and highlight the need for further exploration in diverse populations.

Indexed as

COVID-19PsychometricsResilience, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychological TestsReference ValuesReproducibility of ResultsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesBRSCovid-19 pandemicGerman versionNorm dataRepresentative sample

Identifiers

PMID39334458
PMCPMC11437619

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.