ArticleRevista brasileira de enfermagem2024
Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Healthy Work Environment Assessment Tool in Brazilian culture.
Article in Revista brasileira de enfermagem, 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.
- A Preventive Behavior Questionnaire for Older Workers in Brazil: Protocol for a Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- How social media shapes urban image and conative tourism behaviour among Chinese Generation Z: an extended SOR model.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Influence of the work environment on patient safety and stress among healthcare professionals.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesto adapt and validate the content of the Healthy Work Environment Assessment Tool for Brazilian culture, and evaluate the practical aspects of its application.
methodsmethodological study that followed six stages: translation; synthesis; back translation; content validation by a group of experts, pre-testing and approval of the process by the author of the original instrument.
resultsthe first three stages were carried out by contracted companies. In the committee, two items and the title of a subscale were evaluated in a second round, when consensus was reached among experts. In the pre-test, more than 93% of professionals agreed that the tool was easy to understand. The average completion time was 8.53 minutes. The American Association of Critical-Care Nurses authorized publication of the results.
conclusionsthe adaptation of the tool to Brazilian culture was completed following the adopted framework. In addition to the evidence of content validity, the tool appears promising for managerial use.
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.