Cited by 7Cardiac Health and Mental HealthHealth Education and ValidationCancer survivorship and care

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Testgüte-Vergleich von zwei Instrumenten zur Krankheitsverarbeitung in der kardiologischen Rehabilitation – Trierer Skalen zur Krankheitsbewältigung (TSK) und Freiburger Fragebogen zur Krankheitsverarbeitung (FKV): Comparison of two coping questionnaires in cardiological rehabilitation – the ‘Trierer Skalen zur Krankheitsbewältigung’ (TSK) and the ‘Freiburger Fragebogen zur Krankheitsverarbeitung’ (FKV)

Dörner, Udo, Muthny, Fritz A.·2008·Zeitschrift für Medizinische Psychologie

Abstract

Two common German coping questionnaires, the ‘Trierer Skalen zur Krankheitsbewältigung’ (TSK, Klauer & Filipp, 1993) and the ‘Freiburger Fragebogen zur Krankheitsverarbeitung’ (FKV, Muthny, 1989) were compared in a cross-sectional study (including 224 heart patients in rehabilitation). Both questionnaires are multidimensional (5 scales each) and require approx. 15 minutes response time. Internal consistencies (with one exception) were found to be sufficient or good (Cronbach's α from 0.66 to 0.81), those of the TSK (with a greater number of items per scale and items in full sentences) a little bit higher. With respect to concurrent validity the scales of the two questionnaires obviously measure different dimensions (despite some similiar scale names) and show only low to moderate correlations. Substantial relationships of coping scales with outcome criteria like depression, anxiety and rehabilitation status were found for ‘depressive coping’ of the FKV and ‘rumination’ of the TSK. While the TSK show better reliability, the FKV can be applied in self-rating as well as in ratings by experts and relatives and offers more comparative date in a broad spectrum of fields and diseases.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/zmp-2008-17_2-3_10

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Metadata

Authors
Dörner, U., & Muthny, F. A.
Affiliations
University Hospital Münster (DE)
Corresponding author
Muthny, Fritz A.
Venue
Zeitschrift für Medizinische Psychologie
Publisher
IOS Press
Published
2008-05
Volume
17
Issue
2-3
Pages
125-132
ISSN
  • 0940-5569 (ISSN-L)
  • 1875-9246
OpenAlex
W1157548457
Cited by
7
References
0
Citations by year
2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Zeitschrift für Medizinische Psychologie (publishedVersion)
  • Zeitschrift für Medizinische Psychologie
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
coping with illness, cardiac rehabilitation, questionnaire comparison, psychometric properties, internal consistency, concurrent validity, depressive coping, rumination, depression, anxiety, rehabilitation outcomes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review