ArticleBMC nursing2025
Validation and psychometric testing of the care-related regret intensity scale among clinical nurses: a methodological study.
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
backgroundThe experience of care-related regret among clinical nurses, often stemming from high workloads and the need for quick decision-making, can significantly impact job satisfaction and performance. Recognizing the necessity of measuring this regret, our research aimed to translate and evaluate the psychometric properties of the Care-related Regret Intensity Scale (RIS-10) among Iranian clinical nurses.
methodsIn this methodological study with a cross-sectional design, a sample of 400 clinical nurses was selected using convenience sampling. The Care-related Regret Intensity Scale (RIS-10) was translated into Persian using a forward-backward translation procedure. This translated version was subsequently utilized for psychometric evaluation, which included an assessment of face validity, content validity, and construct validity through Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Furthermore, internal consistency and stability reliability were assessed.
resultsThe RIS-10 maintained the meaning of the original English version and was clear, explicit, and understandable for clinical nurses. The content validity was evaluated using CVR and CVI indices, revealing that all items had a CVR above 0.62 and a CVI exceeding 0.79. EFA identified a single latent factor explaining 68.48% of the total variance. The subsequent CFA demonstrated that all items achieved a factor loading of at least 0.3, with goodness-of-fit statistics supporting an excellent fit for the final RIS-10 model. The values of Cronbach's alpha coefficient and McDonald's omega were 0.924 and 0.921 for the overall scale, respectively. Additionally, the stability was ICC = 0.913 (95% CI, 0.863-0.941).
conclusionThe Persian version of the Care-Related Regret Intensity Scale (RIS-10) is valid and reliable, confirming its suitability for use. It effectively measures the intensity of care-related regret among clinical nurses in Iran. 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.