ArticleBMC nursing2025
Translation and psychometric validation of the Finnish version of the revised second victim experience and support tool: a pilot 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnintentional healthcare harm can also affect involved healthcare professionals making them the second victims. Second victims are found to exhibit several physical and psychological symptoms which affect their personal, social and professional lives. The revised version of the second victim experience and support tool (SVEST-R) has been widely acknowledged given its use to assess second victim experiences among healthcare professionals.
aimsTo translate the revised second victim experience and support tool into Finnish and test the psychometric properties and feasibility of the Finnish version (FI-SVEST-R).
designA cross-sectional online survey was adopted. This study adheres to the STROBE reporting guidelines.
methodsThe tool was translated into Finnish using forward and backward translation which was evaluated by the expert panel including its cultural appropriateness. An online survey was conducted among Finnish healthcare professionals in two different university hospitals between September 2022 and April 2023 to assess the comprehensibility of the questions, response options and feasibility of the tool. The confirmatory factor analysis was conducted for construct validity, and internal consistency was examined.
resultsA total of n = 145 healthcare professionals participated in the study. Results showed a good model fit for the nine-factor structure with 35 items. Root mean squared error of approximation (0.067), comparative fit index (0.895), and Tucker-Lewis index values (0.880) suggested a good model fit. McDonald's Omega ranged from 0.755 to 0.909, with Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.789 to 0.934, whereas factor loadings for all items ranged from 0.390 to 0.970.
conclusionsThe Finnish version of the revised second victim experience and support tool (FI-SVEST-R) was proven to be a valid and reliable tool with strong psychometric properties during the pilot testing. Thus, it can be used to evaluate the extent of the second victim phenomenon and available support resources in Finnish healthcare. It could also be used to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of support programmes. However, due to the relatively low sample size and low factor loadings of a few items, further validation studies are required. IMPACT: FI-SVEST-R can provide an option for the quantitative measurement of the problem related to second victim distress and available support resources in Finland. 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.