ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Validation of the uncertainty stress scale-high-risk pregnancy - Chinese brief version: Rasch analysis.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-risk pregnancy leads to uncertainty and stress in pregnant women due to the threatened of mother and fetus health. The Uncertainty Stress Scale High-Risk Pregnancy Version, a 54-item Chinese version (USS-HRPV-C), has been widely used to assess the uncertainty and stress that women experience during pregnancy. However, the length of the scale may result in a burden for respondents. Thus, a brief version of the USS-HRPV-C is needed for a concise and vigorous assessment. The aim of this study was to shorten the USS-HRPV-C and validate the brief version.
methodsThis study used a cross-sectional design. A convenience sample of 200 women with high-risk pregnancies completed the 54-item USS-HRPV- C. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch model to examine the construct validity of the short version of the USS-HRPV-C. Rasch analysis was used with a stepwise approach to select items with better goodness-of-fit and no differential item functioning (DIF). Additionally, Cronbachs' α and Pearson correlations to evaluate the internal consistency of the original and brief versions. Test analysis modules (TAM) and Lavaan packages in R were used for data analyses.
resultsThe results of CFA supported a two-factor structure of the HRPV-C. Using the Rasch analysis, we reduced the USS-HRPV-C scale from 54 to 17 items. The selected 17 items were robust without displaying differential item functioning. Further, the 17-item short version exhibited satisfactory fit statistics that infit and outfit mean square ranged between 0.71 and 1.35, respectively. Internal consistency of Cronbach's α for the short version of the USS-HRPV-C scale ranged was 0.90 and 0.92 for the subscales of uncertainty and stress respectively. Both subscales of the brief version were significantly related to the original version of USS-HRPV-C.
conclusionsThis study developed a 17-item brief version of the USS-HRPV-C scale, which has demonstrated its satisfactory psychometric properties. Healthcare providers can use the validated brief version of the USS-HRPV-C to proficiently assess women's psychosocial stress and uncertainty during pregnancy.
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.