ArticleNursing open2022
Development and validation of the Distracting Ingenuity Promotion Scale for paediatric nurses to support the psychological outcomes of paediatric patients and their families: A survey-based cross-sectional cohort study.
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 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo develop and validate the Distracting Ingenuity Promotion Scale (DIPS) for paediatric nurses.
designCross-sectional study using anonymized self-administered questionnaires.
methodsFrom July-November 2013, paediatric nurses working in the wards or outpatient departments in 39 medical institutions in Japan were enrolled in the survey. Data were analysed using the Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test and analysis of variance test. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed to validate the factors in the DIPS. Cronbach's α was used to calculate the reliability of the DIPS.
resultsThe DIPS included five subscales comprising 21 items. The goodness-of-fit indices for confirmatory factor analysis had a Comparative Fit Index of 0.923 and a Root Mean Square Error of Approximation of 0.059 and fulfilled the standard external validity criteria. Cronbach's α was 0.707-0.826 for each subscale and 0.895 for the overall scale.
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.