ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Development and validation of the job stressor scale for specialty nurses.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A study of the profiles of perceived inadequate qualifications and associated factors among nursing interns: a latent profile analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Development and psychometric evaluation of the sarcopenia prevention behavior adherence scale for older adults - a mixed methods study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- The moderating role of professional grief in the relationship between job stress dimensions and turnover intention among nurses.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Development and preliminary validation of the nutrition literacy scale for type 2 diabetes mellitus in China-a mixed methods study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a fall health literacy scale for Chinese hospitals from the perspective of older adults.Frontiers in public health · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Specialty nurses play a crucial role in specialized nursing practice, teaching, management, and research. These nurses often face significant work pressure; therefore, scientifically and effectively assessing their job stress and its sources is vital for enhancing the quality of their work. However, there is currently a dearth of verified assessment tools for measuring job stressors among specialty nurses. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and test an instrument to assess the job stressors applicable to specialty nurses. Methods: We conducted a multiphase mixed-methods study. The initial scale items were developed from a literature review and structured interviews. The scale was then refined through two rounds of expert consultation ( Results: The final scale comprises four dimensions with 27 items. The factors included "specialized nursing and work," "workload and time allocation," "patient care," and "work resources and environment." The EFA explained 69.10% of the variance, while the CFA confirmed a good model fit. The content validity index was 0.980 at the scale level and 0.790-1.000 at the item level. The scale's reliability was supported by its high Cronbach's Conclusion: Our findings indicate that the job stressor scale developed in this study is valid and reliable, and is recommended for use among specialty nurses to assess their stressors.
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.