2020
DOI: 10.1590/2237-6089-2019-0032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cross-cultural adaptation of the Internet Gaming Disorder Scale – Short Form (IGDS9-SF) to the Brazilian context

Abstract: Introduction: The Internet Gaming Disorder Scale-Short Form (IGDS9-SF) assesses the severity, harmful effects and/or consequences of excessive online and offline gaming. Its conciseness and theoretical foundations on current diagnostic criteria of gaming disorders make it a useful resource for clinical and screening settings. Objective: To describe the process of cross-cultural adaptation of the IGDS9-SF to the Brazilian context. Methods: The cross-cultural adaptation involved the steps of independent translat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To ensure the scientific rigor of the research instrument, it is crucial to establish validity evidence for the construction of observable variables in the proposed questionnaire. Testing is commonly employed in various assessments, and when an instrument demonstrates appropriate psychometric properties, it can provide valuable benefits to both evaluators and those being evaluated (Donadon et al, 2020). Content validation of the data collection tool was conducted by four academic specialists and four professional specialists, employing the CVC (Table 3).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To ensure the scientific rigor of the research instrument, it is crucial to establish validity evidence for the construction of observable variables in the proposed questionnaire. Testing is commonly employed in various assessments, and when an instrument demonstrates appropriate psychometric properties, it can provide valuable benefits to both evaluators and those being evaluated (Donadon et al, 2020). Content validation of the data collection tool was conducted by four academic specialists and four professional specialists, employing the CVC (Table 3).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of a total of 1567 potential records, 428 duplicate records were removed. In total, 1139 articles were evaluated by reviewing the title and abstract, and 24 passed to the full-text review phase [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. Finally, six met the selection criteria and were included in the systematic review.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, six met the selection criteria and were included in the systematic review. Regarding the excluded articles, ten were not included because they did not report results on GD [ 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 52 ], five studies were excluded because they were instruments or validations of GD [ 23 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 ], two studies did not include the target population (LAC) [ 47 , 48 ], and one study was excluded because it had the same results as an already included study population [ 49 ] ( Figure 1 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%