Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36497604›Full record

Observational studyInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Validation of a Nursing Workload Measurement Scale, Based on the Classification of Nursing Interventions, for Adult Hospitalization Units.

María Fuensanta Hellín Gil, María Dolores Roldán Valcárcel, Ana Myriam Seva Llor, Francisco Javier Ibáñez-López, Marzena Mikla, María José López Montesinos

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Adaptation of the Nursing Activities Score in Latvia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

María Fuensanta Hellín GilFaculty of Nursing, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-0402-0888
María Dolores Roldán ValcárcelFaculty of Nursing, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.
Ana Myriam Seva LlorFaculty of Nursing, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0531-9227
Francisco Javier Ibáñez-LópezEducation Faculty, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2367-7260
Marzena MiklaFaculty of Nursing, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.
María José López MontesinosFaculty of Nursing, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.
Instituto Murciano de Investigación Biosanitaria · ESUniversidad de Murcia · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We conducted validation of a scale to measure nursing workloads, previously designed using NIC interventions within the four nursing functions (patient care, teaching, management, and research).

methodsThis is an analytical, descriptive, prospective, and observational study using qualitative methodology (focus groups and in-depth interviews) with a quantitative and qualitative section (committee of experts and real application of the scale through a validation pilot and with multicentric application, including hospitalization units of internal medicine and surgery of four hospitals). Qualitative analysis was performed with Atlas.ti8 and quantitative analysis with R.

resultsQualitatively, all the participants agreed on the need to measure workloads in all nursing functions with standardized terminology. The expert committee found greater relevance (91.67%) in "prevention" and "health education" as well as consistency with the construct and adequate wording in 99% of the selected items. In the pilot test and multicenter application, the nurses spent more time on the caring dimension, in the morning shift, and on the items "self-care", "medication", "health education", "care of invasive procedures", "wounds care", "comfort", and "fluid therapy". Cronbach's alpha 0.727, composite reliability 0.685, AVE 0.099, and omega coefficient 0.704 were all acceptable. Construct validity: KMO 0.5 and Bartlett's test were significant.

conclusionsThe scale can be considered valid to measure nursing workloads, both qualitatively in obtaining the consensus of experts and health personnel and quantitatively, with acceptable reliability and validity superior to other similar scales.

Indexed as

HospitalizationWorkloadAdultHumansProspective StudiesPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaireshospitalnursingnursing administration researchnursing care managementnursing staffstaff workload

Identifiers

PMID36497604
PMCPMC9737816
OpenAlexW4309845145

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.