ArticleScientific reports2025
Design and psychometric properties of the academic vitality scale in nursing students.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Academic vitality, a dynamic and positive aspect of university life, is crucial for fostering student motivation, academic success, and learning quality, especially in challenging disciplines like nursing. This study, therefore, aimed to design and validate a specific instrument for assessing academic vitality among nursing students. The present study was a methodological investigation focused on instrument design and psychometric evaluation, conducted from March to July 2025 at Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences. Instrument development followed both inductive (qualitative interviews with students) and deductive (literature review of existing sources) approaches, leading to the creation of an item pool. To ascertain face and content validity, qualitative and quantitative evaluations were performed with the participation of faculty members and students. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted using SPSS software to determine the instrument's factorial structure. Additionally, internal consistency coefficients, including Cronbach's Alpha, McDonald's Omega, and Average Inter-item Correlation (AIC), were meticulously evaluated. The instrument's reliability was also assessed using the test-retest method (ICC). Statistical analyses revealed that the final instrument comprises 20 items categorized into two dimensions: "Clinical Vitality," and "Research Vitality,". These two dimensions collectively accounted for approximately 82.43% of the total variance in the data. Furthermore, the instrument demonstrated excellent and acceptable internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.991, McDonald's Omega = 0.991, and AIC = 0.765) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.997). The developed instrument exhibits desirable psychometric properties in terms of validity and reliability, rendering it a robust tool for assessing academic vitality in nursing students. Utilizing this instrument can significantly contribute to identifying factors influencing academic vitality and formulating effective educational and clinical interventions to enhance it.
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.