Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33397381›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2021

Development and psychometric testing of a questionnaire to assess Nurse's perception of risks during enteral nutrition.

Ping Feng, Hui-Li Yang, Lan Xu, Omorogieva Ojo, Xiao-Yan Lu, Hai-Ying Zhang, Xiao-Hua Wang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ping FengDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
Hui-Li YangSchool of Nursing, Medical College of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
Lan XuNursing department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China. xulan1108@sina.com.
Omorogieva OjoDepartment of Adult Nursing and Paramedic Science, University of Greenwich, London, SE9 2UG, UK.
Xiao-Yan LuDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
Hai-Ying ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
Xiao-Hua WangDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University · CNSoochow University · CNUniversity of Greenwich · GB

Funding

Suzhou Science and Technology Project, China. SYS201743
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnteral nutrition (EN) therapy is widely used in clinical practice to provide artificial nutrition to patients, while the incidence of adverse events are relatively highly. In the clinical setting, the occurrence of adverse events is associated with the nurse's risk perception. Thus, using tool to evaluate nurse's risk perception of enteral nutrition is necessary.

methodsThe draft questionnaire with 37-items was formed by comprehensive literature reviews and semi-structured in-depth interviews with 11 nurses. Two iterations of expert consultations were used to evaluate the content validity, and 4 items were deleted in this phrase. A 33-items questionnaire was used to survey 352 nurses from five tertiary hospitals in China from May to July 2019 with convenience sampling. Content validity, construct validity and known-groups validity were evaluated by content validity index (CVI), exploratory factor analysis, and the comparisons of the different EN risk perception levels of nurses at different working departments and different educational backgrounds, respectively. Reliability was tested by internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and split-half reliability.

resultsAfter the exploratory factor analysis, four items were excluded. Finally, the newly developed questionnaire included 29 items explaining 71.356% of the total variance. It consisted of three factors: Risks of operation (15 items); Risks of EN-related adverse events (11 items), and Risks of EN solution selection (3 items). The CVI of the questionnaire was 0.95 and the CVI of items ranged from 0.875-1.0. The results of known-groups validity showed that the nurses with different educational backgrounds had a statistically significant difference of EN risk perception (z = - 3.024, p = 0.002), whereas there was not significantly different between EN risk perception of nurses working in different departments (z = - 1.644, p = 0.100). The Cronbach's α, test-retest reliability, and split-half reliability of the questionnaire were 0.967, 0.818, and 0.815, respectively.

conclusionsThe newly developed questionnaire for assessing nurse's EN risk perception showed good reliability and validity. It can be used as a tool for nursing managers to assess Chinese nurses' EN risk perception ability, so as to help to reduce the occurrence of adverse events during EN implementation.

Indexed as

Enteral nutritionInstrument developmentNursesRisk perception

Identifiers

PMID33397381
PMCPMC7783971
OpenAlexW3120412527

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.