Post-COVID-19 perceived stigma-discrimination scale: psychometric development and evaluation
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.06.21258253: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: Data analysis: Ethical issues: The research ethics board of the Universidad del Magdalena, Santa Marta, Colombia, approved the study (Act 002 of March 26, 2020).
Consent: Participation was voluntary, no incentives were offered, and informed consent was signed under national and international standards for research (World Medical Association, 2018).Sex as a biological variable They were aged between 18 and 89 years (Mean = 47.67, SD = 15.17); 61.52% were women and had a university education. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis The sample size was adequate for exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis since it is recommended to have 20 participants for each item … SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.06.21258253: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: Data analysis: Ethical issues: The research ethics board of the Universidad del Magdalena, Santa Marta, Colombia, approved the study (Act 002 of March 26, 2020).
Consent: Participation was voluntary, no incentives were offered, and informed consent was signed under national and international standards for research (World Medical Association, 2018).Sex as a biological variable They were aged between 18 and 89 years (Mean = 47.67, SD = 15.17); 61.52% were women and had a university education. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis The sample size was adequate for exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis since it is recommended to have 20 participants for each item (MacCallum et al., 2001) Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Study strengths and limitations: This study presents a new instrument to evaluate COVID-19-SDC in Spanish speakers. However, this research has the limitation; it did not quantify the instrument’s stability (test-retest assessment), information necessary when repeated evaluations are made (Afhami et al., 2017). Likewise, it would be interesting to evaluate the scale performance with models based on the item response theory (Liu et al., 2019).
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
