ArticleRevista brasileira de enfermagem2023
Psychometric properties of the Latino Students Patient Safety Questionnaire, Brazilian version.
Article in Revista brasileira de enfermagem, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesto assess the psychometric properties of the Latino Students Patient Safety Questionnaire, Brazilian version.
methodsa methodological study, carried out between April 2020 and January 2021, with 218 nursing and medicine students. Structural and discriminant construct validity were assessed by confirmatory factor analysis and cross factor loadings. Reliability was verified by McDonald's omega, average variance extracted, composite reliability, and item-total correlation.
resultsthe final model reproduced the original structure of 21 items, distributed in five dimensions, requiring the exclusion of one item. Acceptable fit indexes were obtained (x2/gl=2.325; CFI=0.99; TLI=0.98; RMSEA=0.054). Discriminant validity was confirmed. Reliability indicators were adequate, except McDonald's omega, in one factor (0.68), and average variance extracted, in two factors (0.41; 0.47).
conclusionsthe instrument demonstrated evidence of internal validity and satisfactory reliability among nursing and medical 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.