ArticleBMC nursing2024
Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the nurses' attitudes towards communication with the patient scale among Chinese nurses.
Article in BMC nursing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Nurse-Patient Therapeutic Interaction Scale (NuPTIS): a translation and validation study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Cross-cultural validation of the Chinese version of the lean management scale for nursing services in hospitals.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Reliability and validity testing the Chinese version of the nursing surveillance scale: a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Article
- Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the M.D. Anderson symptom Inventory-Multiple Myeloma Module: a translation and validation study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of scales of knowledge, attitude, and practice of self-care for patients with arteriovenous fistula: a translation and verification study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the BENEFITS-CCCSAT based on CTT and IRT: a cross-sectional design translation and validation study.Frontiers in public health · 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
backgroundNurses' attitudes towards communication with patients influence the effectiveness of communication, which could reduce patients' negative emotions and improve their adherence to medication and treatment. The aim of this study was to develop a Chinese version of the nurses' attitudes towards communication with the patient (ACO) scale and examined its validity and reliability.
methodsThe Chinese version ACO scale was generated using the translation-backward translation method and cross-cultural adaption.The psychometric properties of the scale, including item-to-total correlations, discriminative validity, content validity, structural validity, convergent validity, internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability, were evaluated. Data were collected from a convenience sample of 610 clinical nurses from four hospitals and were analyzed using both exploratory factor analysis and second-order confirmatory factor analysis.
resultThe reliability was demonstrated with item-to-total correlations of greater than 0.40, Cronbach's alpha of 0.946 and intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.879. Content validity was acceptable and discriminative validity showed a significant discriminative ability. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a three-factor model. Convergent validity was confirmed by a moderate relation with a measure for nurses' empathy (r = 0.375, P<0.01).The test-retest reliability was satisfactory within a 2-week interval.
conclusionThe ACO is a reliable and valid instrument to assess nurses' attitudes towards communication with patient in Chinese hospitals.
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.