ArticleBMC nursing2025
Turkish validity and reliability of Burnout Syndrome Assessment Scale for nurses working in intensive care units.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThis study aimed to translate the Burnout Syndrome Assessment Scale (BOSAS) for Nurses Working in Intensive Care Units into Turkish validity and reliability.
methodsThe questionnaire was planned to be of a methodological type and translation-back translation methods were used to translate it into Turkish. The content validity was established by submitting it to a panel of 12 faculty members with expertise in nursing. The Burnout Syndrome Assessment Scale (BOSAS) for Nurses Working in Intensive Care Units, the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), and the Nurse Information Form were applied to 200 nurses. Internal consistency analyses were conducted using Cronbach's alpha coefficients and item analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis was employed to evaluate the construct validity. To ascertain the scale's stability over time, a test-retest method was implemented, involving the administration of a questionnaire to 150 intensive care nurses at two-week intervals. The MBI facilitated the assessment of the level of agreement between parallel forms, and intraclass correlations were computed.
resultsFollowing confirming language equivalence for the scale, the content validity index was subsequently computed. The items' content validity indices (CVIs) ranged between 0.833 and 1.000 and were higher than the generally accepted standard level. Nevertheless, since most of the items related to the scale were explained over a single dimension, the factor analysis application was carried out over a single dimension. The MBI was used to assess the interreliability of the Burnout Syndrome Assessment (BOSAS) Scale for Nurses Working in Intensive Care Units in parallel forms. The scale's internal consistency coefficient demonstrated a high-reliability level, achieving a value of 0.95. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) obtained for each subdimension and overall questionnaire were high.
conclusionThe Turkish adaptation of this scale is a valid and reliable tool for evaluating and identifying burnout among nurses in intensive care settings.
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.