ArticleResearch in nursing & health2026
Psychometric Properties of the Traditional Chinese Version of the Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Survey.
Article in Research in nursing & health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric Properties of the Traditional Chinese Version of the Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Survey.Research in nursing & health · 2026Article
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
Abstract
This study aimed to develop and validate the Traditional Chinese version of the Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Survey (TC-ICCAS), a culturally sensitive tool for assessing interprofessional education (IPE) competencies in Taiwan's hierarchical healthcare system. Conducted from 2022 to 2023 at a tertiary medical center and guided by the COSMIN framework, this psychometric validation study involved 324 early-career healthcare professionals. A three-phase process was employed: (1) translation and cultural adaptation with expert review; (2) pilot testing with 30 professionals to ensure cultural relevance; and (3) field testing using post-IPE program surveys. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the field test data confirmed the instrument's six-domain structure (communication, collaboration, roles and responsibilities, patient-centered care, conflict management, and team functioning) and established its construct validity. All subscales demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.86-0.93). Notably, the limited discriminant validity of the "roles and responsibilities" domain was interpreted not as a flaw, but as evidence of the tool's cultural sensitivity, reflecting the authentic role overlap common in Confucian-influenced contexts. The TC-ICCAS provides a reliable and valid tool for evaluating IPE outcomes, filling a critical gap in culturally appropriate instruments for hierarchical settings. Its use can enhance interprofessional training and holds the potential to improve teamwork and patient safety in Taiwan and similar Asian healthcare contexts. No patient or public contribution was included as the study focused on professional 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.