ArticleBMC nursing2025
Turkish adaptation and validation of the ethical decision-making competence scale.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundNursing students often encounter ethical dilemmas throughout their professional training, which can pose challenges to their development. These dilemmas may lead to questioning professional values, hesitation during clinical practice, and even emotional fatigue. Therefore, reliable and valid tools are essential to assess and enhance their ethical decision-making abilities.
methodsConducted as a methodological study, this research involved 233 nursing students from Manisa Celal Bayar University during November and December 2024. Data collection tools included the Ethical Decision-Making Competence Scale and the Inclination to Ethical Values Scale. Structural validity was analyzed using principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysis, while internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's alpha.
resultsThe scale demonstrated acceptable model fit indices [χ2 (129) = 234.701, χ2/df = 3.295, GFI = 0.841, CFI = 0.900, IFI = 0.901, RMSEA = 0.096 (0.087-0.105)], with all factor loadings exceeding 0.4 and achieving statistical significance. Cronbach's alpha values for the four dimensions were 0.865, 0.867, 0.868, and 0.886, indicating strong internal consistency. Furthermore, the test-retest analysis confirmed the scale's stability over time, validating its use for repeated measurements.
conclusionGiven its psychometric strengths, this tool can be effectively employed in future studies focusing on ethical decision-making competencies in nursing education. 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.