Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale: a systematic review psychometrics properties using the COSMIN

Author:

Sharif-Nia Hamid12,Sánchez-Teruel David3,Sivarajan Froelicher Erika4,Hejazi Sima5,Hosseini Lida6,Khoshnavay Fomani Fatemeh7,Moshtagh Mozhgan8,Mollaei Fereshteh9,Goudarzian Amir Hossein107,Babaei Amir10

Affiliation:

1. Traditional and Complementary Medicine Research Center, Addiction Institute Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

2. Department of Nursing, Amol Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

3. Department of Personality, Assessment and Psychological Treatment, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

4. Department of Physiological Nursing, School of Nursing, and Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Medicine, University of California Sand Francisco, San Francisco, CA

5. Bojnurd Faculty of Nursing, North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Bojnurd, Iran

6. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Iran University of Medical Sciences Tehran, Iran

7. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Iran

8. Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Birjand Iran

9. Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran

10. Student Research Committee, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

Abstract

Background: Psychometrical evaluation of persons of diverse contexts and different populations, including general or clinical. Objective: This review study aimed to evaluate the psychometrics quality of resilience scales. Methods: International and Iranian databases were searched with MESH terms, including “psychometric”, “validity”, “reliability”, “Connor-Davidson resilience scale”, “Resilience scale”, for published articles up to 1 February 2023. For each of the selected studies, the risk of bias was evaluated using the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist. Then the COSMIN checklist was used to evaluate the entire text of the article for methodological quality. Results: Considering the inclusion criteria, 80 documents were evaluated. According to the COSMIN’s criteria for evaluating the risk of bias, the current study findings revealed the included studies’ limitations in assessing the three versions of CD-RISC cross-cultural and content validity as well as their stability (e.g. conducting test re-test), whereas the majority of psychometric studies of CD-RISC-25, and CD-RISC-2 rated as very good or adequate in terms of structural validity. In terms of quality assessment of the included studies, the current study indicated that investigating the structural validity of the CD-RISC was mainly done based on exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis was absent. Conclusion: The general result indicates the acceptability of the quality of the studies. However, concerns for measurement properties such as responsiveness and criterion validity as well as the standard error of measurement have been neglected.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Reference117 articles.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3