Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36292454›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Evaluating Measurement Properties of the Adapted Interprofessional Collaboration Scale through Rasch Analysis.

Heike Wieser, Maria Mischo-Kelling, Luisa Cavada, Lukas Lochner, Verena Fink, Carla Naletto, Fabio Vittadello

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese CancerSupportSourceHealth and quality of life outcomes · 2026
    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.

Heike WieserResearch Unit, College of Health-Care Professions, 39100 Bolzano, Italy.
Maria Mischo-KellingFaculty of Social Work, Health and Nursing, University of Applied Sciences Ravensburg-Weingarten, 88250 Weingarten, Germany.
Luisa CavadaPostgraduate Courses Area, College of Health-Care Professions, 39100 Bolzano, Italy.
Lukas LochnerTeaching Support Office, College of Health-Care Professions, 39100 Bolzano, Italy.
Verena FinkNursing Directorate, South Tyrolean Healthcare Trust, 39100 Bolzano, Italy.
Carla NalettoDepartment of Physiotherapy, College of Health-Care Professions, 39100 Bolzano, Italy.
Fabio VittadelloExplora-Research and Statistical Analysis, 35010 Padova, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the German and Italian versions of the Interprofessional Collaboration Scale (IPC scale) by applying a Rasch analysis. Data were gathered from 1182 nurses participating in a cross-sectional study in northern Italy. The scale demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.92). Item polarity of all 13 items was positive, indicating good construct validity. However, revising one item would further improve the validity of the scale. Item stability was confirmed for work experience, workplace, age range, the language version, and gender. The analysis, applying a non-classical test theory, confirmed that the IPC scale is a valid and reliable instrument to measure interprofessional collaboration between nurses and physicians.

Indexed as

instrument validationinterprofessional collaborationIPC scalenursesRasch analysis

Identifiers

PMID36292454
PMCPMC9602463

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.