ArticleCureus2025
Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Psychometric Validation of the Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Survey and the Evidence-Based Practice Self-Efficacy Scale in the Greek Language.
Article in Cureus, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimEvidence-based practice (EBP) improves the quality of healthcare services and enhances patient safety. However, in Greece, the adoption of EBP remains modest, while validated assessment tools in the Greek language for measuring EBP among nurses are limited. The purpose of the study was to translate, culturally adapt, and psychometrically validate the Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Survey and Evidence-Based Practice Self-Efficacy Scale (EBP SES) tools into Greek. METHODOLOGY: The study sample comprised 222 registered nurses, including both clinical nurses and school-based nurses, through convenience sampling. Reliability analyses (Cronbach's α) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to investigate internal consistency and structural validity.
resultsThe instruments showed high reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.78-0.96). The mean value of the Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Survey was 3.88 (standard deviation [SD] = 0.66), and the EBP SES was 73.4 (SD = 14.0), which reflects an overall favorable perception of EBP engagement. In CFA, the five-factor model of the Nursing EBP Survey showed fit indices: Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.960, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = 0.041, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.899, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.885, and χ²/df = 4.1, while the single-factor model of the SES showed GFI = 0.980, SRMR = 0.056, CFI = 0.930, TLI = 0.913, and χ²/df = 3.4, indicating a good fit to the data.
conclusionsThe Greek versions of the instruments demonstrated robust psychometric properties, confirming their reliability and validity for use in the local nursing context. Based on the observed deficits, particularly in domains related to data collection and evidence appraisal, the findings underscore the necessity of implementing structured training programs, integrating EBP content into undergraduate and postgraduate nursing curricula, and developing continuous professional development (CPD) initiatives focused on enhancing evidence-based decision-making competencies.
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.