ArticleNursing open2022
Validation and reliability of the Care Vulnerability Index: A study by interrater agreement and test-retest method.
Article in Nursing open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vulnerability in nursing science: a principle-based concept analysis.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- HealthCare Complexity Index (HCIn): A Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Primary Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Community Vulnerability: Measuring the Health Situation of a Population After COVID-19 Through Electronic Health Record Indicators.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Validation of the Health Index in the Postoperative Period: Use of the Nursing Outcome Classification to Determine the Health Level.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Active and Healthy Confinement: Care Recommendations on Activity, Sleep and Relationships.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Care Robotics: An Assessment of Professional Perception in the Face of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Care Recommendations for the Chronic Risk of COVID-19: Nursing Intervention for Behaviour Changes.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Validation and reliability of the Care Vulnerability Index: A study by interrater agreement and test-retest method.Nursing open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study is to determine the validity and reliability of the Care Vulnerability Index (CVI) as a tool to estimate the need and competence of care.
designA cross-sectional survey including a longitudinal component.
methodsContent validity ratio (CVR) was calculated by interrater agreement of a group of 11 experts in two rounds. The test-retest analysis was measured in an urban population of Colombia with 96 participants through two statistical tests: Pearson's correlation coefficient and the difference in means.
resultsCare Vulnerability Index turned out to be valid with a CVR of 0.879. Reliability by Pearson correlation between test-retest was 0.912 (CI95: 0.872-0.941; p-value <.01) and there was no significant mean difference between test and retest in global score and in clustered groups of variables. Validating CVI will make it possible to prioritize healthcare resources in the population and identify people susceptible to care problems.
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.