ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Development and Psychometric Validation of the Comprehensive Core Competence Instrument for Healthcare Professionals.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. 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
aimTo psychometrically validate a comprehensive core competence (3C) instrument to measure the core competence of healthcare professionals in clinical settings.
designInstrument development and validation study.
methodThis study focused on the fourth phase of instrument development and validation, which involves refining the scale and assessing its psychometric properties. Secondary data from self-reported assessments of core competency levels by healthcare professionals (628 nurses and 450 physicians) working at healthcare institutions in Oman were used. Structural validity was examined via exploratory factor analysis using oblique rotation (Promax). The stability of factorial validity was assessed through transformation analysis and invariance testing using confirmatory factor analyses. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha.
resultsThe development and validation process produced a 3C instrument including 39 items across 11 factors: research and innovation (4 items), patient sustainable care (5 items), strategic leadership (4 items), safety promotion (3 items), tech integration (3 items), quality excellence (4 items), collaborative care delivery (4 items), professional growth (3 items), communication excellence (3 items), ethics and compliance (3 items) and professional practice (3 items). The instrument explained 65.3% and 67.6% of the total observed variance for nurses and physicians, respectively, with Cronbach's alpha for each component above the minimum acceptable value of 0.70.
conclusionThe 3C instrument, developed through structured validation, comprehensively assesses healthcare professionals' core competencies, bridging the gap in existing tools with robust psychometric properties. IMPACT: Healthcare professionals must develop robust and versatile core competencies to address increasing quality and safety patient care demands, escalating costs, unsustainable delivery models and rising stakeholder expectations. The developed 3C instrument is valuable for (1) comprehensively assessing core competencies, (2) suggesting an immediate and short-term action plan and (3) stimulating policies to drive the transformation of the delivery system over the longer term. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
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.