ArticleBMC nursing2025
Consistency evaluation of nursing interns and nurses using the ICF-RS for rehabilitation assessment.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study sought to evaluate the consistency of functional level assessments conducted by nursing interns and an experienced nurse in elderly patients, using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Rehabilitation Set (ICF-RS).
methodsForty-one elderly residents from a care facility in Guangzhou were included in this study. Functional evaluations were performed using the ICF-RS by six nursing interns and one experienced nurse. The consistency of assessments between the nursing interns, as well as between the interns and the experienced nurse, was measured using Kendall and Kappa coefficients.
resultsConsistency among the nursing interns was good, with Kendall coefficients greater than 0.6 for most categories, except for sexual function. However, the consistency between the nursing interns and the experienced nurse was lower in categories such as energy and drive functions (b130), sleep functions (b134), emotional functions (b152), pain sensation (b280), sexual functions (b640), and urination functions (b620), where Kappa coefficients were below 0.3. For other categories, consistency was deemed acceptable (Kappa > 0.3).
conclusionThere is a need to enhance the training of nursing interns to ensure they can effectively utilize the ICF-RS assessment tool. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.