Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41068679›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

Adaptation of the basic resuscitation skills self-efficacy scale in nursing students to Turkish : a validity and reliability study.

Halil Ibrahim Gules, Gulten Sucu Dag

Abstract readMulticenter StudyValidation StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Halil Ibrahim GulesEastern Mediterranean University (EMU), Faculty of Health Sciences, Nursing Department, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Turkey.
Gulten Sucu DagEastern Mediterranean University (EMU), Faculty of Health Sciences, Nursing Department, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Turkey. gulten.dag@emu.edu.tr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNurses' resuscitation self-efficacy levels are a key component in the acquisition of basic resuscitation skills. However, there is no measurement tool to determine nursing students' resuscitation self-efficacy in our country. This study was conducted to adapt in the nursing students the Basic Resuscitation Skills Self-Efficacy scale to Turkish and determine its validity and reliability.

methodsA descriptive, cross-sectional, and methodological design was used. The study was conducted with nursing students from two universities in Northern Cyprus between August 2023 and November 2023. The study included 605, second, third, and fourth-year nursing students. The data were collected using descriptive characteristics form and the basic resuscitation skills self-efficacy scale.

resultsThe scale showed a 2-factor structure, namely CPR and OED use, Casualty Recognition and Safety and consisted of 18 items. In confirmatory analysis, all factor loads were found to be between 0.50 and 0.87. The fit indexes of the inventory were χ2/df = 3.647, GFI = 0.906, NFI = 0.908, CFI = 0.921, RMSEA = 0.079. Cronbach's alpha of the total scale was 0.887.

conclusionsThe Turkish version of the Basic Resuscitation Skills Self-Efficacy Scale was valid and reliable and could be used to determine the students resuscitation self-efficacy.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationPsychometricsSelf EfficacyStudents, NursingClinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesCyprusDefibrillatorsEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsTranslationsUniversitiesYoung AdultBasic resuscitation skillsNursing studentsReliabilitySelf-EfficacyValidity

Identifiers

PMID41068679
PMCPMC12512955

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.