ArticleBMC nursing2025
Preliminary validation of the Suicide Management Competency Scale in a Chinese nurse population: a cross-sectional study.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSuicide represents a significant public health concern at the global level and is a major area of concern for mental health professionals. Nurses are positioned to identify and manage individuals at risk of suicide or suicidal ideation. It is widely acknowledged that ensuring nurses are adequately trained to assess and manage suicidal patients is of paramount importance in the prevention of suicide. The objective of this study was to examine the reliability and structural validity of the Suicide Management Competency Scale (SMCS) in clinical nurses population.
methodsA total of 452 clinical nurses in a third-class hospital in Liaoning Province were selected using convenience sampling. The survey was conducted using the general demographic questionnaire and the Suicide Management Competency Scale (SMCS). The reliability and acceptability of the scale were assessed by checking the consistency of the scale part, the split-half reliability coefficient, and the correlation between each item and the score of the total scale. Confirmatory factor analysis, convergent validity and discriminant validity were used to determine the dimensional structure and validity of the scale.
resultsThe internal consistency of the scale, as indicated by the Cronbach's α coefficient, was 0.902. The split-half reliability coefficient was 0.771. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis were as follows: CMIN/DF = 2.609, RMSEA = 0.060, RMR = 0.040, CFI = 0.957, GFI = 0.930, NFI = 0.933, TLI = 0.949, IFI = 0.958. All of the model fitting indexes were within the acceptable range. The average variance extracted (AVE) of the three subscales ranged from 0.500 to 0.583. The combined reliability values (CR) range from 0.848 to 0.888, indicating that the SMCS scale exhibits good convergence validity. The analysis of the correlation coefficient between the subscale and the total scale revealed that the AVE square root value of each subscale is between 0.707 and 0.763, which is greater than the correlation coefficient between the two indicators. This indicates that there are significant differences between the subscales of the SMCS, that the internal structure of the questionnaire is highly differentiated, and that the discrimination validity is good.
conclusionTo the best of our knowledge, this is the inaugural study to report the utilisation of the Suicide Management Competency Scale (SMCS) in the context of clinical nursing. The findings offer preliminary support for the utilisation of the SMCS in clinical nurses. In the future, nursing managers will be able to effectively evaluate clinical nurses' ability to manage and prevent suicide, as well as train nurses in this area, with the ultimate goal of saving as many lives as possible.
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.