ArticlePorto biomedical journal
From the challenge of assessing autonomy to the instruments used in practice: A scoping review.
Article in Porto biomedical journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Erratum: From the challenge of assessing autonomy to the instruments used in practice: a scoping review.Porto biomedical journalArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Autonomy is one of the essential components to live a quality life. Monitoring this autonomy is, in effect, essential, to allow the nurses to conceive, implement and evaluate interventions aimed at its promotion or even maintenance. For this reason, this scoping review aims to map the evidence to identify and analyze the instruments used to assess the person's autonomy, which emerges from scientific production. Methods: Scoping review based on the recommended principles by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The research was realized in the databases: Scopus (excluding MEDLINE), CINAHL complete (via EBSCO, Excluding MEDLINE), and MEDLINE (via PubMed). Two independent reviewers evaluated the articles' pertinence for the study's investigation, the extraction, and synthesis of articles. Results: After the analysis, according to the inclusion criteria established, 34 articles were selected, allude to 7 different instruments to assess autonomy. Conclusions: The need for further development at this level is highlighted, namely through the construction and validation of more comprehensive instruments, integrating the different components of the concept of autonomy.
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.