ArticleInvestigacion y educacion en enfermeria2023
Validation of Nursing Outcome Indicators in Patients with Postsurgical Delirium.
Article in Investigacion y educacion en enfermeria, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To validate the content of the indicators proposed from the Nursing Outcome Classification in a care plan for delirium management in older adults. Methods: Content validity study, conducted under the expert judgment technique. The procedure was developed in five moments: organization of indicators that respond to the nursing outcome classification for delirium management, support with literature of the indicators that responds to the result, selection of experts, establishment of agreements, and discussion. Quality criteria evaluated: pertinence and relevance, the Content Validity Coefficient and average scores assigned by the experts were calculated. Results: The study had the participation of 14 experts. The indicators, according to criteria of pertinence and relevance evaluated by experts showed a global average content index value of 0.93; 97.05% (66) of the indicators had Content Validity Coefficient > 0.75. Conclusion: The quantitative findings of the indicator validation process showed high relevance and pertinence index, which favors their being applied to measure care changes in patients with delirium.
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.