ArticleJournal of medicine and life2024
Psychometric evaluation of a novel tool for assessing gestational diabetes and hypertension care: knowledge, attitudes, and practices of midwives and nurses.
Article in Journal of medicine and life, 2024. 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.
- Assessment of neonatologists' competency in managing gestational diabetes complications: a cross-sectional analysis from China.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While standardized assessment of knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) related to gestational diabetes and hypertension is possible with a valid tool, existing research remains limited. This prospective validation study aimed to develop and validate a novel tool to assess the KAP of midwives and obstetric nurses. We included 125 midwives and obstetric nurses who routinely care for patients with gestational diabetes and hypertension. The tool demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha): knowledge (0.729, 95% CI, 0.654-0.776), attitude (0.756, 95% CI, 0.690-0.814), and practices (0.925, 95% CI, 0.905-0.943). Difficulty indices (d) ranged from 0.38 to 0.99 (knowledge), 0.41 to 0.99 (attitudes), and 0.41 to 0.93 (practices), indicating appropriate item difficulty. Discrimination indices (D) confirmed items could differentiate between respondents with low and high knowledge levels (D range: 0.02-0.77 for knowledge, 0.06-0.64 for attitudes, 0.20-0.84 for practices). The robust psychometric properties of this tool support its use in future research on KAP related to diabetes and gestational hypertension management in midwives and nurses. This instrument has the potential to be valuable in various settings, including baseline assessment before educational programs or evaluation of learning outcomes after interventions.
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.