ArticleClinical nursing research2020
Reliability and Validity of the Checklist for Function-Focused Care in Service Plans.
Article in Clinical nursing research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Testing the Implementation of Function-focused Care in Assisted Living Settings.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2021Trial
- [Research on provision standards and appropriateness of functional recovery training services in long-term care facilities: An exploratory mixed method study].Journal of Korean gerontological nursing · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the Checklist for Function-Focused Care in Service Plans. Function-focused care is a care approach that optimizes function and physical activity during all care interactions. This study used baseline data from the first cohort of the study titled Dissemination and Implementation of Function-Focused Care for Assisted Living Using the Evidence Integration Triangle (FFC-AL-EIT). A total of 242 participants were recruited from 26 assisted living facilities. The majority of participants were White, female, and unmarried. There was support for internal consistency with an alpha coefficient of .96, interrater reliability with a correlation of .80, construct validity based on Rasch analysis and INFIT statistics ranging from 0.69 to 1.29, and a significant association with function-focused care activities. Although there is some support for reliability and validity of the measure, modifications are recommended to add more challenging items.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.