Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35766739›Full record

ReviewRevista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica

Design and validation of a questionnaire to measure hantavirus preventive practices in an endemic community.

Janeth Agrazal-García, Lydia Gordon-de Isaacs, Ricaurte Tuñón

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Janeth Agrazal-GarcíaCentro Regional Universitario de Azuero, Universidad de Panamá, Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8230-1496
Lydia Gordon-de IsaacsFacultad de Enfermería, Universidad de Panamá, Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6322-0551
Ricaurte TuñónCentro Regional Universitario de Coclé, Universidad de Panamá, Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6506-7052
Universidad de Panamá · PA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OBJECTIVE.: To design and analyze the evidence of content validity, internal structure, and reliability of a questionnaire of preventive practices for hantavirus in an endemic community in the Panamanian context. MATERIAL AND METHODS.: Quantitative study of instrumental design. This research was conducted in four phases: Literature review, content validity through expert judgment with the individual aggregate method and the calculation of the V Aiken, pilot test and psychometric validation, through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability analysis of instrument scores with ordinal alpha. RESULTS.: Content validity was evidenced and V Aiken values higher than 0.70 were reported in the lower limit of 95% CI. In the internal structure we identified that the 8 items underlie a single factor that explains 60.70% of the total variance of the test and with factor loadings greater than 0.40; during the reliability analysis, we obtained an ordinal alpha value of 0.84, which is considered good. CONCLUSIONS.: The Hantavirus preventive practical questionnaire is a brief instrument that shows acceptable psychometric properties to measure the activities or behaviors that people carry out to prevent hantavirus.

Indexed as

OrthohantavirusFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35766739
PMCPMC11397759
OpenAlexW4224217127

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.