Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36750822›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

Development and psychometric testing of a clinical reasoning rubric based on the nursing process.

Nargess Ramazanzadeh, Akram Ghahramanian, Vahid Zamanzadeh, Leila Valizadeh, Saeideh Ghaffarifar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
10.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Improved Activity Evaluations: An Iterative Process Using the Rasch Model.The Journal of continuing education in the health professions
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nargess RamazanzadehStudents' Research Committee, Nursing and Midwifery School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Akram GhahramanianDepartment of Medical-Surgical Nursing, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. ghahramaniana@gmail.com.
Vahid ZamanzadehDepartment of Medical-Surgical Nursing, Nursing and Midwifery School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Leila ValizadehDepartment of Pediatric Nursing, Nursing and Midwifery School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Saeideh GhaffarifarMedical Education Research Center, Health Management and Safety Promotion Research Institute, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Tabriz University of Medical Sciences · IRShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

Tabriz University of Medical Sciences 65135
6 · The paper itself

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

Education, Nursing, BaccalaureateStudents, NursingClinical CompetenceClinical ReasoningEducational MeasurementHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsClinical reasoningEducationEvaluationNursing processRubric

Identifiers

PMID36750822
PMCPMC9904873
OpenAlexW4319338001

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.