ArticleBMJ open2026
Validation and psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Physician Self-Efficacy to Manage Emotional Challenges (P-PSMEC) scale among medical students: a methodological cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTranslate and culturally adapt the Physician Self-Efficacy to Manage Emotional Challenges (PSMEC) scale into Persian, then assess the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the PSMEC (P-PSMEC) among medical students.
designMethodological cross-sectional study.
settingArdabil University of Medical Sciences, Ardabil, Iran.
participantsA convenience sample of 237 medical students participated in the study between July and December 2024. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The main focus was on evaluating the psychometric performance of the 17-item P-PSMEC scale, particularly its intended five-factor structure, examined through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Secondary outcomes encompassed face validity, content validity, internal convergent validity, discriminant validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Additionally, an ordinal CFA sensitivity analysis was performed using the weighted least squares mean-adjusted and variance-adjusted (WLSMV) estimator.
resultsThe P-PSMEC showed acceptable face and content validity with a Scale Content Validity Index/AVE of 0.871. The main maximum likelihood-based CFA indicated good model fit: χ²/df=1.415, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.041, Comparative Fit Index (CFI)=0.984 and standardised root mean square residual (SRMR)=0.021. An ordinal CFA with WLSMV produced similar results: χ²=168.234, df=109, RMSEA=0.048, CFI=0.981, Tucker-Lewis Index=0.976, SRMR=0.049, with standardised loadings between 0.52 and 0.89. Evidence for internal convergent validity was supported by average variance extracted (AVE) values above 0.50 and composite reliability values above 0.70. Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio values were below 0.85, and maximum shared variance was lower than AVE, indicating good discriminant validity. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach's α=0.902), and test-retest reliability was also strong (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.901).
conclusionsThe P-PSMEC shows good validity and reliability for measuring self-efficacy in managing emotional challenges among Persian-speaking medical students. The results support the proposed five-factor structure, although additional multisite, longitudinal, external validation and measurement-invariance studies are necessary.
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.