ArticleBMC psychology2026
Validity and reliability of the Amharic version Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS-25) in pediatric oncology.
Article in BMC psychology, 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
backgroundThe short form of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS-25) has been frequently used for assessing anxiety and depression in clinical and community samples. However, the Amharic version of RCADS-25 (RCADS-25(A)) has not been validated. This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of RCADS-25(A) in pediatric oncology.
methodsThis study included 142 children aged 8-18 years. The reliability of the scale was assessed by calculating internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Convergent validity was assessed by examining the correlation between the RCADS-25(A) and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 Generic Core Scale (PedsQL™ 4.0 GCS). Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to evaluate the two-factor structure of RCADS-25 identified in the original version.
resultsThe mean age of the participants was 11.6 ± 3.2 years. The RCADS-25(A) demonstrated evidence of good validity and reliability. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were 0.95, 0.94, and 0.96 for the anxiety subscale, depression subscale, and total scale, respectively, while intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.81, 0.80, and 0.87 for the same domains, indicating good test-retest reliability. The RCADS-25(A) correlated significantly with PedsQL™ 4.0 GCS (r = -0.97, p < 0.001). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-factor model (χ2/df = 1.44; CFI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.06; SRMR = 0.05; TLI = 0.95).
conclusionsThe RCADS-25(A) appears to demonstrate promising validity and reliability, suggesting its potential utility for assessing anxiety and depression in pediatric oncology. The findings underscore the need for further validation studies employing larger and more diverse samples, as well as the adoption of multimethod assessment approaches. The use of parent-report versions and studies in other populations and Ethiopian languages are highlighted to further establish the scale's psychometric properties and cross-cultural applicability.
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.