ArticleBMC medical education2023
Development and psychometric testing of a clinical reasoning rubric based on the nursing process.
Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of an assessment tool for breast self-examination: rubric.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Development and psychometric evaluation of virtual consultation scoring rubric for the standardized patient.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Structured oral clinical assessment for pharmacotherapy competencies in medical education: a study of validity and reliability analyses of seven domains.Korean journal of medical education · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitude and practice toward probiotics among the general population: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Psychometric properties of comprehensive cognitive, affective, and psychomotor competency assessment scales in psychodynamic psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Improved Activity Evaluations: An Iterative Process Using the Rasch Model.The Journal of continuing education in the health professionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo facilitate the development of clinical reasoning skills in nursing students, educators must possess the ability to teach and evaluate them. This study aimed to describe the development and validation process of an analytic rubric of clinical reasoning skills based on the nursing process in undergraduate nursing students.
methodsA seven-step method was used for rubric development. The initial validation process of the rubric of clinical reasoning was performed with the participation of key stakeholders to assess its face and content validity as well as applicability in the classroom and bedside. An initial pilot test was performed based on scenario-based examinations in the nursing process training course so that convergent validity was used to show how closely the new scale is related to the previous measure for evaluating students' tasks. Internal consistency and inter-rater correlation coefficient measurement for reliability were assessed.
resultsThe rubric to assess clinical reasoning skills was developed into eight categories according to the five stages of the nursing process. Content and face validity of the rubric were done qualitatively and resulted in a clear, simple rubric relevant to clinical reasoning skills assessment. The convergent validity was confirmed by the conventional method. The reliability was approved by a high inter-rater correlation coefficient based on the assessment by two random independent raters.
conclusionThe clinical reasoning meta-rubric developed in this study meets the purpose of the study. This analytical rubric can be applied to guide teaching and learning as well as evaluate clinical reasoning based on the findings. Testing the applicability confirmed its validity and reliability for assessing clinical reasoning skills in nursing process education during the undergraduate nursing program.
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.