ArticleInternational wound journal2024
The Turkish version of the Skin Tear Knowledge Assessment Instrument (OASES): Validity and reliability study.
Article in International wound journal, 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.
- Knowledge gaps in pressure injury, medical device-related pressure injury, and skin tear among intensive care unit nurses.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- The Turkish version of the Skin Tear Knowledge Assessment Instrument (OASES): Validity and reliability study.International wound journal · 2024Article
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
This study was conducted to adapt the Skin Tear Knowledge Assessment Instrument (OASES) into Turkish and to verify its validity and reliability. This study was conducted on 314 nurses in Türkiye between November 2023 and February 2024 to test the psychometric properties of OASES. The instrument consists of 20 items clustered into six domains. The cultural adaptation process was carried out according to the International Testing Commission guidelines: Turkish translation, expert panel, content validity, translation back to English, preliminary study and the final version of the instrument. To check the validity of the multiple-choice test, item difficulty and discriminating index were analysed. The reliability of the instrument was evaluated to the retest 14 days after the first test. Scale level content validity by 11 experts in wound care was 0,97 (I-CVI = 0.8-1.0). In the item analysed of the OASES, the item difficulty index was 0,51 (p-value = 0.34-0.76) and the discriminating index was 0.40 (D-value = 0.26-0.51). The 2-week test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient of the overall instrument was 0.90 (95% CI = 0.79-0.95). The Turkish version of OASES is a valid and reliable measurement instrument to evaluate nurses' knowledge levels regarding skin tears with acceptable psychometric properties. It can be applied in nursing education, research and practice to evaluate the knowledge of Turkish speaking nurses about skin tears.
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.