ArticleNursing open2019
Design and psychometric properties of an instrument to assess metacognition in moral reasoning in medicine.
Article in Nursing open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe present study aims at designing and assessing the psychometric properties of MCMR instruments to lead the medical ethics education to further goals and more definite steps.
designThis is a cross sectional study.
methodThis study was conducted in two phases; identifying the items and designing the instrument. In the preliminary phase, the qualitative study was carried out using conventional content analysis method. In the second phase, psychometric evaluation of instrument was done using face and content validity, construct validity and reliability.
resultsOn the first phase of this study, 135 items were identified. After determining face and content validity, 111 items reached the stage of exploratory factor analysis. This instrumental analysis indicated the existence of 74 items and ten factors whose variance of the total is explained as 46.883%. Cronbach's alpha value was 0/75. And the intra-cluster correlation coefficient was 0.808.
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.