Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33318857›Full record

ArticleNursing open2021

Nurses' perceptions of caring activities in nursing.

Neriman Akansel, Roger Watson, Nursel Vatansever, Aysel Özdemir

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A Chinese Version of the Caring Dimensions Inventory: Reliability and Validity Assessment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Neriman AkanselDepartment of Nursing Bursa Uludag University Faculty of Health Sciences Bursa Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-1451-4761
Roger WatsonFAAN Professor of Nursing University of Hull Faculty of Health and Social Care Hull UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8040-7625
Nursel VatanseverDepartment of Nursing Bursa Uludag University Faculty of Health Sciences Bursa Turkey.
Aysel ÖzdemirDepartment of Nursing Bursa Uludag University Faculty of Health Sciences Bursa Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to determine nurses' perceptions of caring activities in nursing. Design: A descriptive study design. Methods: A Turkish translation of the 25-item version of the Caring Dimensions Inventory was completed by 260 nurses working in one university hospital. Data were analysed using Mokken scaling. Results: Technical aspects of nursing were highly endorsed items such as "observing the effects of a medication on a patient, measuring vital signs, being technically competent with a clinical procedure, consulting with the doctor" except for the item "providing privacy for a patient" which is a psychosocial item. The range of items included in the Mokken scale with "providing privacy for a patient" (mean = 4.31) as the most endorsed, and "exploring the patient's lifestyle" (mean = 2.60) being the least endorsed item. Listening to patients and involving them in their care are not considered as caring.

Indexed as

NursesTranslationsHumansPerceptioncaringitem response theoryMokken scalingnursingTurkey

Identifiers

PMID33318857
PMCPMC7729643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.