ArticleNarra J2026
Psychometric properties of the Burmese version of Self-Stigma Scale: A study among older Myanmar migrants in Thailand.
Article in Narra J, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Self-stigma is a major barrier to mental health help-seeking among marginalized populations, including older Myanmar migrants in Thailand. Despite its importance, this issue has been understudied in this population, and no validated Burmese-language instrument has been available to date. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Burmese version of the Self-Stigma Scale-Short Form (SSS-SF), with particular emphasis on its factor structure, reliability, and validity among older Myanmar migrants in Thailand. Participants (n=211) aged ≥60 years were recruited through online platforms and community outreach initiatives. The SSS-SF was translated and culturally adapted in accordance with international guidelines. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test multiple structural models, and reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Convergent and discriminant validity were examined through correlations with the depression and anxiety subscales of the Outcome Inventory-21 (OI-21), the Mental Help-Seeking Intention Scale (MHSIS), and the Extraversion domain of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire-20 (ZKA-20). Initial analyses indicated that the 9-item bifactor model provided the best representation of the data, although overall fit remained only modest. After removal of four misfitting items, a shortened 5-item version demonstrated improved fit as a unidimensional model. Reliability was good for the 9-item scale (α=0.855) and acceptable for the 5-item scale (α=0.828). Convergent validity was supported by significant positive correlations between self-stigma and OI-21 depression (
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.