ArticleFrontiers in psychology2019
An Assessment of the Reliability and Factorial Validity of the Chinese Version of the Health Professional Education in Patient Safety Survey (H-PEPSS).
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Mindfulness Meditation on Doctors' Mindfulness, Patient Safety Culture, Patient Safety Competency and Adverse Event.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Perceived patient safety competencies among Slovak nursing students: a psychometric analysis.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Internal structure validity of the Brazilian version of the Health Professional Education in Patient Safety Survey.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2026Article
- Health professionals' perceptions of patient safety competencies: psychometric properties of the French version of the H-PEPSS in France and Switzerland.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Psychometric properties of the Latino Students Patient Safety Questionnaire, Brazilian version.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2023Article
- Modification and validation of the COVID-19 stigma instrument in nurses: A cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Psychometric properties of the Postpartum Depression Literacy Scale (PoDLiS) among Chinese perinatal women: a cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Adaptation and Validation of the COVID-19 Stigma Instrument in Nurses:A Cross-sectional Survey.Research square · 2022Article
- Instruments for measuring patient safety competencies in nursing: a scoping review.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
- Perceptions of Patient Safety Competence Using the Modified Version of the Health Professional Education in Patient Safety Survey (H-PEPSS) Instrument Among Dental Students in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.Advances in medical education and practice · 2022Article
- The knowledge about patient safety among undergraduate nurse students in Cyprus and Greece: a comparative study.BMC nursing · 2021Article
- Article
- Self-reported confidence in patient safety competencies among Chinese nursing students: a multi-site cross-sectional survey.BMC medical education · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA nursing student's reflection on their knowledge and competence in patient safety (PS) may prepare them to provide safer care in certain circumstances. The Health Professional Education in PS Survey (H-PEPSS) is a validated tool for assessing the perceptions of nursing students with regards to competence in PS. The H-PEPSS is widely used internationally but is not available in Chinese.
objectivesThis study aimed to translate the H-PEPSS into Chinese and test its psychometric properties among Chinese undergraduate nursing students.
designThis was a cross-sectional online survey that was conducted in 2018. SETTINGS: Seven nursing schools in North, East, Northeast, Central, Southwest, South, and Northwest China.
participantsA total of 732 final-year undergraduate nursing students were recruited by convenience sampling.
methodsTranslation was conducted rigorously in accordance with an adapted version of Brislin's translation model. Psychometric evaluation was conducted by incorporating classical test theory and item response theory (IRT) analysis.
resultsThe Chinese version of the H-PEPSS (both the classroom and clinical practice versions) achieved a Cronbach's α, marginal reliability and 2-week test-retest reliability of >0.85. A six-factor solution explaining 81.49% and 82.32% of the total variance was obtained for the classroom and clinical practice versions, respectively. This was further validated by confirmatory factor analysis. IRT analysis showed that the scale offers a broad range of information on PS competence and discriminates efficiently between patients with high and low levels of competence in PS.
conclusionThe Chinese version of the H-PEPSS is a reliable and valid instrument that is capable of evaluating competence in PS perceived by undergraduate nursing students. In addition, the survey may also be used to evaluate gaps in classroom knowledge and clinical competence, and to offer valid data for designing or tailoring new education strategies.
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.