ArticleInternational wound journal2024
Traditional Chinese-version reliability test of the Pieper-Zulkowski pressure ulcer knowledge: Psychometric and assessment.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of Nurses' Knowledge Regarding Pressure Injury: A National Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Impact of Formal and Lifelong Education on Croatian Nurses' Knowledge of Pressure Ulcers: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Traditional Chinese-version reliability test of the Pieper-Zulkowski pressure ulcer knowledge: Psychometric and assessment.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was to translate the Pieper-Zulkowski pressure ulcer knowledge test (PZ-PUKT) into Traditional Chinese and evaluate its psychometric properties as well as identify the predictors of knowledge on pressure injury. The PZ-PUKT was translated into Traditional Chinese (TC-PZ-PUKT), and its content validity was evaluated. A total of 296 nurses participated in this study and completed the 72-item TC-PZ-PUKT online. The reliability of the TC-PZ-PUKT was analysed by evaluating its internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Hierarchical regression was used to determine factors associated with TC-PZ-PUKT scores. Content validity was achieved with a score of 0.986. Internal consistency was observed to be reliable, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.858. The mean knowledge score on the TC-PZ-PUKT was 72.5%, with a 1-week test-retest reliability of r = 0.849. Education level, certification as a wound specialist and self-learning through reading articles, books or guidelines on pressure injury were significantly associated with TC-PZ-PUKT scores. The TC-PZ-PUKT is a valid and reliable tool. Education level, certification as a wound specialist and self-learning regarding pressure injury are related to knowledge of pressure injury.
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.