ArticleJournal of advances in medical education & professionalism2022
Psychometric Properties of Clinical Learning Environment Comparison Survey Questionnaire in Nursing Students.
Article in Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of the Traineeship Evaluation Questionnaire (TEQ) from the physiotherapy student's perception.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Appraisal and Evaluation of the Learning Environment Instruments of the Student Nurse: A Systematic Review Using COSMIN Methodology.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Continuous evaluations of clinical education and learning in nursing require the use of valid and reliable instruments. The present study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the CLECS questionnaire (a questionnaire for assessing the clinical learning environment) in nursing students. Methods: This is a psychometric study conducted on 118 nursing students. Through email correspondence with the corresponding author, permission was obtained from the developer to translate, validate, and use the CLECS. The CLECS was translated into Persian. The psychometric process was performed after the translation and cultural adaptation steps. Cronbach's alpha was used to assess the reliability. The instrument validity was assessed through convergent, discriminant, and confirmatory factor analysis. We used AMOS 18 for confirmatory factor analysis and SPSS-20 for reliability, convergent, and discriminant validity. Results: A total of 118 nursing students participated in the study. The Cronbach's alpha value of the questionnaire was 0.942. Convergent validity was obtained in all dimensions above 0.4. The confirmatory factor analysis results confirmed the fit of the final model and showed that the present questionnaire was 6-dimensional. Most of the questions in the questionnaire did not have a good differential validity. The highest and lowest means were related to the nursing process and holism dimensions, respectively. Conclusion: Based on the findings of this study, CLECS, except in the discriminant validity, has good validity and reliability, which can be considered to examine the learning environment of undergraduate nursing students.
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.