ArticleBMC medical education2025
Assessment of the validity and reliability of the nurses' professional values scale-revised in Persian version among nursing students.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Assessing professional values in nursing education: adaptation and validation of the Hong Kong nurses professional values scale - revised (HK-NPVS-R).BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEvaluating professional values is crucial to developing effective strategies for integrating them into professional performance and clinical education. A standard questionnaire is an instrument that can be used to evaluate professional values. This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the Nurses Professional Values Scale-Revised (NPVS-R) among nursing students in the Persian language.
methodsThis methodological and cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the NPVS-R among nursing students. Following a back-translation process, the Persian version was subjected to face, content, and construct validity assessments. Construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) on a sample of 439 nursing students during their internships at 16 public universities of medical sciences in Iran between April and July 2019. Additionally, convergent and divergent validity were assessed on a separate sample of 105 nursing students. The reliability of the instrument was assessed using both internal consistency measures and the test-retest method. Furthermore, the psychometric properties of the questionnaire were analyzed using Samejima's Gradual Response Model. Data analysis was performed using SPSS (version 19) and MPLUS (version 5.1).
resultsAll components had a content validity ratio greater than 0.6 and a content validity index of 1, indicating excellent content validity. Exploratory factor analysis reduced the items to 25, with five factors explaining 52.26% of the variance. The scale exhibited strong convergent validity (r = 0.73, p < 0.001) and satisfactory divergent validity (r = 0.12, p = 0.21; r = 0.07, p = 0.47). Test-retest reliability was excellent, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.92. Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranged from 0.53 to 0.83 for the factors and 0.91 for the entire scale, showing good internal consistency. IRT analysis confirmed that alpha parameters for all items were statistically significant and at an acceptable level. Thus, the Persian NPVS-R, with 25 items and 5 factors, is a valid and reliable tool for nursing students.
conclusionsThe Persian NPVS-R, comprising 25 items and 5 factors, demonstrated excellent validity and reliability. This scale serves as a standardized tool for evaluating the professional values of nursing students, suitable for application in educational and clinical settings to enhance nursing practice and education.
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.