ArticleBMC nursing2025
Development and validation of the pain management competency scale for nurses and a nationwide survey of Chinese nurses.
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 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.
- Nurses' Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Pain Management at a Tertiary Hospital in Saudi Arabia: Impact of an Evidence-Based Instructional Program.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cancer pain awareness and communication practices among physicians in China: a nationwide mixed-methods study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a competency assessment scale for nurses in reproductive medicine departments.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Influencing factors of pain management knowledge and attitudes among emergency nurses in China: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- High-fidelity simulation improves acute pain management competency in final-year medical students.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Analysis of Current Pain Management in Total Knee Arthroplasty in 8 Tertiary Hospitals in China Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Trust in artificial intelligence-based follow-up in hospital information systems: development and validation of a new scale.BMC psychology · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNurses' competency in pain management is essential for effectively alleviating patients' acute pain, controlling chronic pain, and promoting patient recovery. However, reliable tools for evaluating these competencies across different clinical specialties and healthcare settings are lacking. This study aimed to develop and validate a Pain Management Competency Scale for Nurses (PMCSN) and to assess the pain management competencies of nurses in China through a nationwide survey.
methodsAn item pool and a draft scale were developed through literature reviews, semi-structured interviews, and expert panel discussions. This was followed by refinement of the scale via Delphi expert consultations and a pilot test. To validate the scale, 342 nurses were conveniently sampled from six hospitals in Eastern and Central China. The validation process included item analysis, internal consistency reliability assessment, test-retest reliability (with 40 nurses retaking the questionnaire after a 14-day interval), content validity (evaluated by six experts using a 4-point Likert scale), and structural validity (assessed through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses). The validated scale was then applied in a survey of 1,500 nurses from 15 hospitals across Eastern, Central, and Western China. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and t-tests.
resultsThe PMCSN comprised six primary dimensions-Pain Assessment and Monitoring, Pharmacological Pain Management, Non-Pharmacological Pain Management, Management of Analgesic Adverse Effects, Patient/Family Education, and Professional Development-and includes 52 tertiary items. The PMCSN scores ranged from 6 to 120, calculated by summing the standardized scores across the six dimensions, with higher scores indicating greater competency in pain management. The scale's Cronbach's α was 0.974 (dimension-specific values ranging from 0.863 to 0.935) and a test-retest reliability of 0.871. The content validity index (CVI) of the scale was 0.965. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) showed that the six-factor model explained 67.50% of the variance. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated good model fit, with average variance extracted (AVE) values ranging from 0.659 to 0.811 and composite reliability (CR) between 0.909 and 0.973, confirming good convergent validity. The square roots of the AVE values exceeded the inter-factor correlations, indicating good discriminant validity. In the nationwide survey, the average PMCSN score among 1,500 nurses was 101.27 ± 20.97. Nurses with higher education levels scored higher (F = 14.173, p < 0.01), as did those working in Eastern regions (F = 24.632, p < 0.01) and tertiary hospitals (T = -5.476, p < 0.01).
conclusionsThe PMCSN is a valid and reliable tool for assessing nurses' pain management competencies. It provides a standardized approach for evaluation and guides targeted interventions to improve competency. Regional and hospital-level disparities highlight the need for enhanced training in underdeveloped areas and collaboration between hospitals to promote balanced healthcare resources.
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.