ArticleBMC health services research2024
Workplace dignity scale in Iranian nurses: translation and psychometric evaluation.
Article in BMC health services research, 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.
- Dignity of the nurse: A hermeneutic literature review.Nursing ethics · 2026Review
- Respect, equality, and recognition in practice: a qualitative analysis of nurses' workplace dignity in China.BMC medical ethics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWorkplace dignity is defined as a person's perception of respect and trust, equal and fair treatment, valuing the person, independence, freedom of expression, and decision-making enjoyed by the employee in the workplace. Therefore, this study aimed to develop the Workplace Dignity Scale (WDS) and evaluate its psychometric properties.
methodsIn this methodological study, WDS was translated based on Beaton et al. Guideline. After assessing face and content validity (using CVI, CVR, modified kappa, and item impact), 250 nurses were selected by random sampling from Kashan hospitals in 2023. Then, WDS was assessed through expletory factor analysis (EFA), known-groups comparison, internal consistency, and stability. The ceiling and floor effects were also examined. Data were analyzed using SPSS v16 by Kruskal-Wallis test, Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's Omega, interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimum detectable changes (MDC).
resultsThe scale's CVI, CVR, and modified kappa were above 0.79. Item impact was higher than 1.5. EFA extracted three factors, including "general dignity, respect, and indignity", that could explain 70.6% of the total variance in scale. WDS could differentiate between the three groups in terms of occupation satisfaction status. Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's Omega, ICC, SEM, and STC of scale were 0.949, 0.950, 0.970, 2.793, and 7.742, respectively.
conclusionThe Persian version of the WDS has shown validity and reliability for measuring workplace dignity among nurses in the Iranian context.
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.