ArticleBMC nursing2025
Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Quiet Quitting Scale.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Outcomes Tool (SAHOT) in elderly SAH patients.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Academic Tangping scale for college students in China: scale development, validation and application.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Quiet quitting in nursing: a concept analysis.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of a Nurse-Specific Scale to Assess Influencing Factors in Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation: An i-PARIHS-Based Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Development, Reliability and Validity of Engagement in Exercise Rehabilitation Scale for Patients with Stroke.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe phenomenon of quiet quitting has attracted considerable attention within the nursing community. Elevated quiet quitting levels can weaken the work environment, reducing healthcare efficiency and quality. However, appropriate assessment tools to measure this phenomenon remain unavailable in China. This study aimed to translate the Quiet Quitting Scale into Chinese and evaluate its psychometric properties.
methodsThe Brislin translation model was used to translate the Quiet Quitting Scale into Chinese. A total of 420 nurses were recruited from hospitals in Central China. Item analysis was conducted using the Critical Rate, correlation coefficient, and internal consistency methods. Reliability was evaluated through internal consistency, split-half reliability, and test-retest reliability. The content validity of the Chinese version was assessed using the Delphi method. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were performed to evaluate the construct validity of the Chinese version. Data were analyzed using SPSS 29.0 and Mplus 8.0 software.
resultsThe Chinese version of the Quiet Quitting Scale demonstrated robust content validity (S-CVI/Ave: 0.989, CVR:0.800-1.000). The three-factors model was obtained by using exploratory factor analysis, explaining 77.93%, and confirmatory factor analysis supported acceptable construct validity (χ2/df = 2.224, CFI = 0.963, TLI = 0.945, RMSEA = 0.077). Additionally, the scale demonstrated a Cronbach's α of 0.856, split-half reliability was 0.921, test-retest reliability was 0.851, and McDonald's Omega was 0.887.
conclusionsThe Chinese version of the Quiet Quitting Scale (QQS) demonstrated strong reliability and validity, making it a valuable tool for assessing quiet quitting behaviors among nurses in both clinical and managerial contexts. This scale can help identify at-risk individuals and support the development of targeted interventions aimed at improving work quality and efficiency. Future research should assess the scale's applicability across various healthcare settings and its long-term impact.
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.