ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2024
Instrument for classifying dependency in neonatal intensive care: analysis of agreement and reliability.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto analyze the reliability of the items that compose the instrument for classifying newborns according to the degree of dependence on nursing care in a neonatal intensive care unit.
methodmethodological study that analyzed the agreement and reliability of the instrument in a neonatal intensive care unit. Six care nurses and a research nurse assessed 35 newborns and completed the instrument, which was made up of 15 areas of care. The weighted Kappa coefficient and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient were used for analysis.
resultsthe areas of: weight (92%), oxygenation (93%) and catheter control (95%) had almost perfect agreement and the area of reaction to stimuli (50%) had poor agreement. The areas of elimination and vital signs showed low reliability, due to the low variability of responses. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient was 0.94.
conclusionthere are variations in the evaluations of some areas of care due to the imprecise description of items to which scores are assigned, however the instrument is reliable for categorizing the type of care (minimal, intermediate and intensive). Its use can contribute to measuring the quality and safety of newborn care.
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.