ArticleBMC nursing2024
Psychometric testing of the training needs for advance care planning scale for clinicians and nurses.
Article in BMC nursing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measurement instruments in advance care planning: A systematic review of psychometric properties.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026Review
- Development and Validation of a Nurse-Specific Scale to Assess Influencing Factors in Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation: An i-PARIHS-Based Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Community nurses' willingness to implement Advance Care Planning (ACP) and their attitudes toward death: current status and correlation analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStudies have shown that Chinese Clinicians and nurses have positive attitudes toward ACP, but no local tools exist to assess their need for ACP knowledge and skills training. resulting in their inability to initiate ACP conversations as well as poor end-of-life care for patients. Therefore, this study aims to assess the needs of Chinese Clinicians and nurses for ACP knowledge and skills training and assess the validity and reliability of a questionnaire on the Training Needs for Advance Care Planning (TNACP) scale.
methodsFrom October to November 2021, 170 clinicians and nurses were pre-surveyed using a preliminary draft of the questionnaire. The responses were screened using item analysis, Cronbach's alpha coefficient, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to describe the internal consistency and stability of the questionnaire. The Content validity index (CVI), Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to test the validity of the questionnaire.
resultsAfter independent samples t-test analysis, Except for the entry "A2", the critical ratio between the two groups of the remaining 23 items was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Based on the above screening methods, the "A2" item was deleted, and the final number of questionnaire items was 23. The I-CVI was 0.79-1.00, and the S-CVI/Ave was 0.90. Three common factors were extracted-the cumulative contribution rate was 69.969%, and the factor loading of all items was 0.506-0.843 (all > 0.40). The results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the Training Needs for Advance Care Planning (TNACP) scale model fit well(X
conclusionsThe TNACP scale has good reliability and validity and can be used to assess Chinese Clinicians and nurses' training needs for implementing ACP.
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.