ArticleRevista brasileira de enfermagem2025
Nursing care in potential organ donor maintenance: EMPDO website validity.
Article in Revista brasileira de enfermagem, 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
objectivesto validate care-educational technology, such as a website, with the aim of supporting nursing care in potential brain-dead donor maintenance.
methodsa methodological approach study for technical-scientific and didactic-illustrative validity of EMPDO website. In the technical-scientific dimension, nurses assessed the "objectives", "relevance", "structure and presentation" domains, using the Content Validity Index. In the didactic-illustrative dimension, web designers assessed the "content", "language", "graphic illustrations", "cultural adequacy" and "motivation" domains. The Suitability Assessment of Materials cut-off point was used.
resultsthe overall Content Validity Index of the technical-scientific content reached 0.97. In the didactic-illustrative dimension, 25.7 points out of 26 points were achieved. Suggestions allowed inconsistencies to be corrected for the final version.
conclusionsthe website, built with the best scientific evidence of nursing care in potential brain-dead donor maintenance, received a favorable opinion from experts, who emphasized that it is an innovative, unprecedented and relevant technology.
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.