ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
An Observational Cross-Sectional Analysis of the Correlation between Clinical Competencies and Clinical Reasoning among Italian Registered Nurses.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of educational intervention using surgery preference cards on anxiety and clinical competence among operating room nursing students in general surgeries: a randomized controlled trial study.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Quality of nursing documentation and clinical reasoning competence: The mediating role of interprofessional collaboration.SAGE open medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ability, knowledge, aptitude, and skill are the terms identified in the literature as the attributes of the concept of clinical competence. This implies that in order to act competently in their own context, the nurse must be able to make decisions which mainly depend on the ability to put clinical reasoning into practice. However, the evaluation of clinical reasoning in the various clinical-care activities of nursing competence is a necessary operation to prevent routine attitudes. From the perspective of an assessment of nursing competences, the aim of this study is to validate the relationship between the degree of competence recognized in a specific clinical setting and the amount of clinical reasoning executed by nurses. The study design was a cross-sectional observational design, following the guidelines of the Strengthening Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) of observational studies. Both the Italian Nurse Competence Scale and the Nurse Clinical Reasoning Scale were used. The data was collected between 25 January and 5 March 2022. Four hundred twenty-four clinical nurses participated by completing and returning the questionnaires. The instruments underwent assessment to ensure internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Their validity was tested with the validity of known content, construct, and groups. This is supported by statistically significant correlations between the different variables examined and the scores of the different dimensions of the Italian Nurse Competence Scale and the Italian Nurse Clinical Reasoning Scale. The data collected showed an excellent average level of competencies and clinical reasoning, M = range of 72.24 and 63.93, respectively. In addition, we observed satisfactory scores across all dimensions of I-NCS (significance range: 0.000-0.014) and I-NCRS (significance range: 0.000-0.004). The understanding and development of clinical reasoning has also brought out new aspects that require further research. This study provides a fresh perspective on the correlation between clinical competences and clinical reasoning, representing a novel attempt to analyze their relationship.
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.