xml: <clinical_study>
    <!-- This xml conforms to an XML Schema at:
      https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/html/images/info/public.xsd -->
    <required_header>
      <download_date>ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on September 20, 2023</download_date>
      <link_text>Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.</link_text>
      <url>https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05962554</url>
    </required_header>
    <id_info>
      <org_study_id>RCT iJobs</org_study_id>
      <nct_id>NCT05962554</nct_id>
    </id_info>
    <brief_title>iJobs - an Internet Intervention for the Unemployed</brief_title>
    <acronym>iJobs</acronym>
    <official_title>iJobs - an Internet Intervention for the Unemployed: a Randomized Controlled Trial</official_title>
    <sponsors>
      <lead_sponsor>
        <agency>West University of Timisoara</agency>
        <agency_class>Other</agency_class>
      </lead_sponsor>
    </sponsors>
    <source>West University of Timisoara</source>
    <oversight_info>
      <is_fda_regulated_drug>No</is_fda_regulated_drug>
      <is_fda_regulated_device>No</is_fda_regulated_device>
    </oversight_info>
    <brief_summary>
      <textblock>
        The current study aims to test the efficacy of iJobs, an online intervention for the&#xD;
        unemployed. iJobs is an online adaptation of the JOBS program.&#xD;
      </textblock>
    </brief_summary>
    <detailed_description>
      <textblock>
        The current study is a two-arm randomized controlled trial that will test the efficacy of&#xD;
        iJobs (a web-based adaptation of the JOBS program) against a waiting list control group.&#xD;
        Participants from the control group will be enrolled in iJobs 2 weeks after the experimental&#xD;
        group finishes the program. iJobs is a 2-week intervention consisting of 5 modules focusing&#xD;
        on discovering job skills, job search strategies, preparing effective resumes, exercising&#xD;
        different types of interviews, and overcoming setbacks in the job search process. iJobs was&#xD;
        previously tested in a feasibility and acceptability trial.&#xD;
      </textblock>
    </detailed_description>
    <overall_status>Recruiting</overall_status>
    <start_date type="Actual">June 6, 2023</start_date>
    <completion_date type="Anticipated">October 1, 2023</completion_date>
    <primary_completion_date type="Anticipated">July 26, 2023</primary_completion_date>
    <phase>N/A</phase>
    <study_type>Interventional</study_type>
    <has_expanded_access>No</has_expanded_access>
    <study_design_info>
      <allocation>Randomized</allocation>
      <intervention_model>Parallel Assignment</intervention_model>
      <intervention_model_description>The two independent groups (intervention vs. waiting list control group) will be crossed with three measurement times (i.e., baseline, post-intervention, and 1-month follow-up). Hence, the design will be a 2 (intervention vs. control) X 3 (baseline, post-intervention, and 1-month follow-up) factorial design.</intervention_model_description>
      <primary_purpose>Other</primary_purpose>
      <masking>None (Open Label)</masking>
    </study_design_info>
    <primary_outcome>
      <measure>Participants' self-efficacy regarding the job search process</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention and follow-up (approximately 2 weeks and 6 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>The Job Search Self-Efficacy Scale (20-item) measures participants' perception of their ability to gain employment. The minimum score is 20 and the maximum is 100. A higher score means a better outcome (increased job search self-efficacy).</description>
    </primary_outcome>
    <primary_outcome>
      <measure>Participants' job search intensity and effort</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention and follow-up (approximately 2 weeks and 6 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>The investigators will use a version of Blau's Job-search behaviors scale adapted to the contemporary context and Romanian population. The scale measures participants' involvement in job search activities in terms of frequency and intensity. The minimum score is 16 and the maximum is 80. A higher score means a better outcome (increased job search behavior effort).</description>
    </primary_outcome>
    <primary_outcome>
      <measure>The quality of participants' job search behaviors</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention and follow-up (approximately 2 weeks and 6 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>The Job search quality scale has 20 items and measures the quality in which the job search behaviors are performed. The minimum score is 20 and the maximum is 100. A higher score means a better outcome (increased job search quality).</description>
    </primary_outcome>
    <secondary_outcome>
      <measure>Participants' ability to deal with setbacks in the job search process</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>Inoculation against setbacks (i.e., participants' ability to deal with setbacks) will be measured using 2 items retrieved from previous studies. The minimum score is 2 and the maximum is 10. A higher score means a better outcome (presence of inoculation against setbacks).</description>
    </secondary_outcome>
    <secondary_outcome>
      <measure>Participants' overall self-esteem</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>Rosenberg's Self Esteem Scale measures global self-worth by measuring both positive and negative feelings about the self using 10 items. The minimum score of Rosenberg's Self Esteem Scale is 10 and the highest one is 40. A higher score means a better outcome.</description>
    </secondary_outcome>
    <secondary_outcome>
      <measure>Participants' anxiety regarding their future career</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>The investigators will measure participants' anxiety regarding their future career with the Future Career Anxiety Scale. The minimum score is 5 and the maximum is 25. A higher score means a worse outcome (increased anxiety).</description>
    </secondary_outcome>
    <secondary_outcome>
      <measure>Generalised Anxiety symptoms</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>The investigators will measure participants' anxiety symptoms using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment. This is a 7-item instrument that uses the DSM-V criteria to assess anxiety symptom severity. The minimum score is 0 and the highest one is 21. A higher score means a worse outcome (a higher level of anxiety).</description>
    </secondary_outcome>
    <secondary_outcome>
      <measure>Depression symptoms</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>The investigators will measure participants' depression symptoms with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. The scale measures participants' severity of depression using DSM IV criteria. The minimum score is 0 and the highest one is 27. A higher score means a worse outcome (more severe symptoms of depression).</description>
    </secondary_outcome>
    <secondary_outcome>
      <measure>Participants' mental health complaints</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>The investigators will measure participants' mental health complaints with the Mental Health Complaints Scale. This is a 5-item instrument that will be used to assess mental health complaints. The minimum score is 6 and the highest is 30. A higher score means a worse outcome.</description>
    </secondary_outcome>
    <secondary_outcome>
      <measure>Participants' psychological capital</measure>
      <time_frame>Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>The investigators will measure participants' psychological capital with the 12-item Compound PsyCap Scale. The minimum score is 12 and the highest is 72. A higher score means a better outcome.</description>
    </secondary_outcome>
    <other_outcome>
      <measure>Physical health</measure>
      <time_frame>Baseline only</time_frame>
      <description>The investigators will use a short version of Ware's Physical Health Complaints Scale to measure participants' perceptions of their health. The minimum score is 4 and the highest is 20. A higher score means a worse outcome (worse physical health).</description>
    </other_outcome>
    <other_outcome>
      <measure>Treatment adherence</measure>
      <time_frame>Post-intervention only (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>Drop out rate; The number of completed assignments; Quality of completed assignment (qualitative rating of the degree of completeness and depth of the answer for each assignment, conducted by two independent experts based on apriori established coding grids).</description>
    </other_outcome>
    <other_outcome>
      <measure>Satisfaction with the intervention</measure>
      <time_frame>Post-intervention only (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>Satisfaction with the intervention will be measured using 17 items. Eleven items are measured on a 4-points, 5-points, and 10-points Likert scale. Each item will be analyzed separately. A higher score means greater satisfaction. The other 6 items are open-ended questions and imply qualitative analysis.</description>
    </other_outcome>
    <other_outcome>
      <measure>System usability</measure>
      <time_frame>Post-intervention only (approximately 2 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>We will use a 10-item questionnaire designed to measure participants' satisfaction with TalentLMS, the online platform used for the program delivery. The total score of System Usability Scale is 0 and the highest one is 100. A higher score means a better outcome.</description>
    </other_outcome>
    <other_outcome>
      <measure>Sociodemographic information</measure>
      <time_frame>Baseline only</time_frame>
      <description>Age, gender, residential area, educational level, average monthly income, unemployment period, work experience, and targeted professional field.</description>
    </other_outcome>
    <other_outcome>
      <measure>Employment status</measure>
      <time_frame>Follow-up only (approximately 6 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>Self-reported employment status will be measured at follow-up, using a dichotomous question.</description>
    </other_outcome>
    <other_outcome>
      <measure>Employment satisfaction</measure>
      <time_frame>Follow-up only (approximately 6 weeks)</time_frame>
      <description>Self-reported employment quality will be measured at follow-up using 4 questions. One of them is a dichotomous question, while the other 3 questions are measured on a Likert scale. The minimum score is 3, and the maximum is 30. A higher score means greater satisfaction with the job.</description>
    </other_outcome>
    <number_of_arms>2</number_of_arms>
    <enrollment type="Anticipated">180</enrollment>
    <condition>Unemployment</condition>
    <arm_group>
      <arm_group_label>Intervention group</arm_group_label>
      <arm_group_type>Experimental</arm_group_type>
      <description>The group that will be first randomly allocated to iJobs.</description>
    </arm_group>
    <arm_group>
      <arm_group_label>Waiting list control group</arm_group_label>
      <arm_group_type>Experimental</arm_group_type>
      <description>This group will receive the intervention 2-weeks after the intervention group finishes it.</description>
    </arm_group>
    <intervention>
      <intervention_type>Behavioral</intervention_type>
      <intervention_name>iJobs</intervention_name>
      <description>iJobs is a 2-week intervention consisting of 5 modules focusing on discovering job skills, job search strategies, preparing effective resumes, exercising different types of interviews, and overcoming setbacks in the job search process. This is an adaptation of the JOBS program.</description>
      <arm_group_label>Intervention group</arm_group_label>
      <arm_group_label>Waiting list control group</arm_group_label>
    </intervention>
    <eligibility>
      <criteria>
        <textblock>
          Inclusion Criteria:&#xD;
  &#xD;
            -  Unemployed and looking for a job&#xD;
  &#xD;
            -  Work as volunteers and are looking for a paid job&#xD;
  &#xD;
            -  Have a PC or laptop and basic digital competencies&#xD;
  &#xD;
          Exclusion Criteria:&#xD;
  &#xD;
            -  They don't have internet access and are not available during the two weeks of the&#xD;
               program&#xD;
        </textblock>
      </criteria>
      <gender>All</gender>
      <minimum_age>18 Years</minimum_age>
      <maximum_age>60 Years</maximum_age>
      <healthy_volunteers>Accepts Healthy Volunteers</healthy_volunteers>
    </eligibility>
    <overall_official>
      <last_name>Andrei Rusu</last_name>
      <role>Principal Investigator</role>
      <affiliation>West University of Timisoara</affiliation>
    </overall_official>
    <overall_contact>
      <last_name>Andrei Rusu</last_name>
      <phone>747174071</phone>
      <phone_ext>+40</phone_ext>
      <email>andrei.rusu@e-uvt.ro</email>
    </overall_contact>
    <overall_contact_backup>
      <last_name>Alexandra Bodnaru</last_name>
      <email>alexandra.bodnaru@e-uvt.ro</email>
    </overall_contact_backup>
    <location>
      <facility>
        <name>West University of Timisoara</name>
        <address>
          <city>Timişoara</city>
          <zip>300223</zip>
          <country>Romania</country>
        </address>
      </facility>
      <status>Recruiting</status>
      <contact>
        <last_name>Andrei Rusu</last_name>
      </contact>
    </location>
    <location_countries>
      <country>Romania</country>
    </location_countries>
    <reference>
      <citation>Bangor, A., Kortum, P. &amp; Miller, J. (2009). Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. Journal of Usability Studies, 4(3), 114-123.</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Bodnaru, A., Rusu, A., Blonk, R., Vîrgă, D., Iliescu, D., &amp; Van den Broeck, A. (2023, May 4). Bodnaru_et_al_preprint. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/tdseq</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Blau, G. (1994). Testing a two-dimensional measure of job search behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 59, 288-312. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1994.1061</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Curran, J., Wishart, P., &amp; Gingrich, J. (1999). JOBS: A manual for teaching people successful job search strategies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Michigan Prevention Research Center.</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x.</citation>
      <PMID>11556941</PMID>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the Self. New York, NY: Basic Books.</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Saks, A.M., Zikic, J., &amp; Koen, J. (2015). Job search self-efficacy: Reconceptualizing the construct and its measurement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 86, 104-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.11.007</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092.</citation>
      <PMID>16717171</PMID>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Tsai C.T., Hsu H., Hsu Y.C. (2017). Tourism and hospitality college students' career anxiety: Scale development and validation. Journal of Hospitality &amp; Tourism Education, 29(4), 158-165. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2017.1382365</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Van Hooft, E.A.J., Van Hoye, G., &amp; Van den Hee, S.M. (2022). How to Optimize the Job Search Process: Development and Validation of the Job Search Quality Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 30(3), 474-505. https://doi.org/10.1177/10690727211052812</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Virga D, De Witte H, Cifre E. The Role of Perceived Employability, Core Self-Evaluations, and Job Resources on Health and Turnover Intentions. J Psychol. 2017 Oct 3;151(7):632-645. doi: 10.1080/00223980.2017.1372346. Epub 2017 Oct 6.</citation>
      <PMID>28985167</PMID>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Vîrga, D. &amp; Rusu, A. (2018). Core self-evaluations, job search behaviour and health complaints. The mediating role of job search self-efficacy. Career Development International, 23(3), 261-273. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-0208</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Vuori, J., &amp; Vinokur, A.D. (2005). Job-search preparedness as a mediator of the effects of the Tyohon Job Search Intervention on re-employment and mental health. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(3), 275-291. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.308</citation>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Lorenz T, Beer C, Putz J, Heinitz K. Measuring Psychological Capital: Construction and Validation of the Compound PsyCap Scale (CPC-12). PLoS One. 2016 Apr 1;11(4):e0152892. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152892. eCollection 2016.</citation>
      <PMID>27035437</PMID>
    </reference>
    <reference>
      <citation>Berwick DM, Murphy JM, Goldman PA, Ware JE Jr, Barsky AJ, Weinstein MC. Performance of a five-item mental health screening test. Med Care. 1991 Feb;29(2):169-76. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199102000-00008.</citation>
      <PMID>1994148</PMID>
    </reference>
    <verification_date>May 2023</verification_date>
    <study_first_submitted>June 19, 2023</study_first_submitted>
    <study_first_submitted_qc>July 24, 2023</study_first_submitted_qc>
    <study_first_posted type="Actual">July 27, 2023</study_first_posted>
    <last_update_submitted>July 24, 2023</last_update_submitted>
    <last_update_submitted_qc>July 24, 2023</last_update_submitted_qc>
    <last_update_posted type="Actual">July 27, 2023</last_update_posted>
    <responsible_party>
      <responsible_party_type>Sponsor</responsible_party_type>
    </responsible_party>
    <keyword>iJobs</keyword>
    <patient_data>
      <sharing_ipd>No</sharing_ipd>
    </patient_data>
    <!-- Results have not yet been posted for this study                                          -->
  </clinical_study>
  
  
text: download date: ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on September 20, 2023
  link text: Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.
  url: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05962554
  org study id: RCT iJobs
  nct id: NCT05962554
  lead sponsor: 
  is fda regulated drug: No
  is fda regulated device: No
  The current study aims to test the efficacy of iJobs, an online intervention for the
        unemployed. iJobs is an online adaptation of the JOBS program.
  The current study is a two-arm randomized controlled trial that will test the efficacy of
        iJobs (a web-based adaptation of the JOBS program) against a waiting list control group.
        Participants from the control group will be enrolled in iJobs 2 weeks after the experimental
        group finishes the program. iJobs is a 2-week intervention consisting of 5 modules focusing
        on discovering job skills, job search strategies, preparing effective resumes, exercising
        different types of interviews, and overcoming setbacks in the job search process. iJobs was
        previously tested in a feasibility and acceptability trial.
  allocation: Randomized
  intervention model: Parallel Assignment
  intervention model description: The two independent groups (intervention vs. waiting list control group) will be crossed with three measurement times (i.e., baseline, post-intervention, and 1-month follow-up). Hence, the design will be a 2 (intervention vs. control) X 3 (baseline, post-intervention, and 1-month follow-up) factorial design.
  primary purpose: Other
  masking: None (Open Label)
  measure: Participants' self-efficacy regarding the job search process
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention and follow-up (approximately 2 weeks and 6 weeks)
  description: The Job Search Self-Efficacy Scale (20-item) measures participants' perception of their ability to gain employment. The minimum score is 20 and the maximum is 100. A higher score means a better outcome (increased job search self-efficacy).
  measure: Participants' job search intensity and effort
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention and follow-up (approximately 2 weeks and 6 weeks)
  description: The investigators will use a version of Blau's Job-search behaviors scale adapted to the contemporary context and Romanian population. The scale measures participants' involvement in job search activities in terms of frequency and intensity. The minimum score is 16 and the maximum is 80. A higher score means a better outcome (increased job search behavior effort).
  measure: The quality of participants' job search behaviors
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention and follow-up (approximately 2 weeks and 6 weeks)
  description: The Job search quality scale has 20 items and measures the quality in which the job search behaviors are performed. The minimum score is 20 and the maximum is 100. A higher score means a better outcome (increased job search quality).
  measure: Participants' ability to deal with setbacks in the job search process
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: Inoculation against setbacks (i.e., participants' ability to deal with setbacks) will be measured using 2 items retrieved from previous studies. The minimum score is 2 and the maximum is 10. A higher score means a better outcome (presence of inoculation against setbacks).
  measure: Participants' overall self-esteem
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: Rosenberg's Self Esteem Scale measures global self-worth by measuring both positive and negative feelings about the self using 10 items. The minimum score of Rosenberg's Self Esteem Scale is 10 and the highest one is 40. A higher score means a better outcome.
  measure: Participants' anxiety regarding their future career
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: The investigators will measure participants' anxiety regarding their future career with the Future Career Anxiety Scale. The minimum score is 5 and the maximum is 25. A higher score means a worse outcome (increased anxiety).
  measure: Generalised Anxiety symptoms
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: The investigators will measure participants' anxiety symptoms using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment. This is a 7-item instrument that uses the DSM-V criteria to assess anxiety symptom severity. The minimum score is 0 and the highest one is 21. A higher score means a worse outcome (a higher level of anxiety).
  measure: Depression symptoms
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: The investigators will measure participants' depression symptoms with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. The scale measures participants' severity of depression using DSM IV criteria. The minimum score is 0 and the highest one is 27. A higher score means a worse outcome (more severe symptoms of depression).
  measure: Participants' mental health complaints
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: The investigators will measure participants' mental health complaints with the Mental Health Complaints Scale. This is a 5-item instrument that will be used to assess mental health complaints. The minimum score is 6 and the highest is 30. A higher score means a worse outcome.
  measure: Participants' psychological capital
  time frame: Change from baseline to post-intervention (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: The investigators will measure participants' psychological capital with the 12-item Compound PsyCap Scale. The minimum score is 12 and the highest is 72. A higher score means a better outcome.
  measure: Physical health
  time frame: Baseline only
  description: The investigators will use a short version of Ware's Physical Health Complaints Scale to measure participants' perceptions of their health. The minimum score is 4 and the highest is 20. A higher score means a worse outcome (worse physical health).
  measure: Treatment adherence
  time frame: Post-intervention only (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: Drop out rate; The number of completed assignments; Quality of completed assignment (qualitative rating of the degree of completeness and depth of the answer for each assignment, conducted by two independent experts based on apriori established coding grids).
  measure: Satisfaction with the intervention
  time frame: Post-intervention only (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: Satisfaction with the intervention will be measured using 17 items. Eleven items are measured on a 4-points, 5-points, and 10-points Likert scale. Each item will be analyzed separately. A higher score means greater satisfaction. The other 6 items are open-ended questions and imply qualitative analysis.
  measure: System usability
  time frame: Post-intervention only (approximately 2 weeks)
  description: We will use a 10-item questionnaire designed to measure participants' satisfaction with TalentLMS, the online platform used for the program delivery. The total score of System Usability Scale is 0 and the highest one is 100. A higher score means a better outcome.
  measure: Sociodemographic information
  time frame: Baseline only
  description: Age, gender, residential area, educational level, average monthly income, unemployment period, work experience, and targeted professional field.
  measure: Employment status
  time frame: Follow-up only (approximately 6 weeks)
  description: Self-reported employment status will be measured at follow-up, using a dichotomous question.
  measure: Employment satisfaction
  time frame: Follow-up only (approximately 6 weeks)
  description: Self-reported employment quality will be measured at follow-up using 4 questions. One of them is a dichotomous question, while the other 3 questions are measured on a Likert scale. The minimum score is 3, and the maximum is 30. A higher score means greater satisfaction with the job.
  arm group label: Intervention group
  arm group type: Experimental
  description: The group that will be first randomly allocated to iJobs.
  arm group label: Waiting list control group
  arm group type: Experimental
  description: This group will receive the intervention 2-weeks after the intervention group finishes it.
  intervention type: Behavioral
  intervention name: iJobs
  description: iJobs is a 2-week intervention consisting of 5 modules focusing on discovering job skills, job search strategies, preparing effective resumes, exercising different types of interviews, and overcoming setbacks in the job search process. This is an adaptation of the JOBS program.
  arm group label: Intervention group
  arm group label: Waiting list control group
  criteria: 
  gender: All
  minimum age: 18 Years
  maximum age: 60 Years
  healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
  last name: Andrei Rusu
  role: Principal Investigator
  affiliation: West University of Timisoara
  last name: Andrei Rusu
  phone: 747174071
  phone ext: +40
  email: andrei.rusu@e-uvt.ro
  last name: Alexandra Bodnaru
  email: alexandra.bodnaru@e-uvt.ro
  facility: 
  status: Recruiting
  contact: 
  country: Romania
  citation: Bangor, A., Kortum, P. & Miller, J. (2009). Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. Journal of Usability Studies, 4(3), 114-123.
  citation: Bodnaru, A., Rusu, A., Blonk, R., Vîrgă, D., Iliescu, D., & Van den Broeck, A. (2023, May 4). Bodnaru_et_al_preprint. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/tdseq
  citation: Blau, G. (1994). Testing a two-dimensional measure of job search behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 59, 288-312. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1994.1061
  citation: Curran, J., Wishart, P., & Gingrich, J. (1999). JOBS: A manual for teaching people successful job search strategies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Michigan Prevention Research Center.
  citation: Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x.
  PMID: 11556941
  citation: Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the Self. New York, NY: Basic Books.
  citation: Saks, A.M., Zikic, J., & Koen, J. (2015). Job search self-efficacy: Reconceptualizing the construct and its measurement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 86, 104-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.11.007
  citation: Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092.
  PMID: 16717171
  citation: Tsai C.T., Hsu H., Hsu Y.C. (2017). Tourism and hospitality college students' career anxiety: Scale development and validation. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 29(4), 158-165. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2017.1382365
  citation: Van Hooft, E.A.J., Van Hoye, G., & Van den Hee, S.M. (2022). How to Optimize the Job Search Process: Development and Validation of the Job Search Quality Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 30(3), 474-505. https://doi.org/10.1177/10690727211052812
  citation: Virga D, De Witte H, Cifre E. The Role of Perceived Employability, Core Self-Evaluations, and Job Resources on Health and Turnover Intentions. J Psychol. 2017 Oct 3;151(7):632-645. doi: 10.1080/00223980.2017.1372346. Epub 2017 Oct 6.
  PMID: 28985167
  citation: Vîrga, D. & Rusu, A. (2018). Core self-evaluations, job search behaviour and health complaints. The mediating role of job search self-efficacy. Career Development International, 23(3), 261-273. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-0208
  citation: Vuori, J., & Vinokur, A.D. (2005). Job-search preparedness as a mediator of the effects of the Tyohon Job Search Intervention on re-employment and mental health. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(3), 275-291. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.308
  citation: Lorenz T, Beer C, Putz J, Heinitz K. Measuring Psychological Capital: Construction and Validation of the Compound PsyCap Scale (CPC-12). PLoS One. 2016 Apr 1;11(4):e0152892. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152892. eCollection 2016.
  PMID: 27035437
  citation: Berwick DM, Murphy JM, Goldman PA, Ware JE Jr, Barsky AJ, Weinstein MC. Performance of a five-item mental health screening test. Med Care. 1991 Feb;29(2):169-76. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199102000-00008.
  PMID: 1994148
  responsible party type: Sponsor
  sharing ipd: No