ArticleBMC nursing2026
Cross-cultural validation of the Chinese version of the nurses' ethical decision-making around end-of-life care scale: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC nursing, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn end-of-life care, nurses’ ability to make sound ethical decisions is critical to safeguarding patients’ dignity and quality of life. However, China still lacks a measurement tool tailored to this specific context for assessing such competence. This study, therefore, aimed to localize the Nurses’ Ethical Decision-Making around End-of-Life Care Scale (NEDM-EOLCS) into Chinese and to examine its psychometric characteristics among Chinese nurses.
methodsA cross-sectional study design was conducted. The study was conducted between October 2024 and December 2024. The Chinese version of the NEDM-EOLCS scale was initially developed using the Brislin translation model, cross-cultural debugging, and a pre-survey tailored to Chinese linguistic and cultural contexts. 450 nurses completed the Chinese version of the NEDM-EOLCS scale. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was employed to analyse the data from Group 1 (n = 225) in order to elucidate the factor structure, whereas Group 2 data (n = 225) were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to verify the model’s suitability; additionally, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and reliability tests were carried out.
resultsA total of 450 nurses participated in the survey. The Scale-level Content Validity Index (S-CVI) was 0.98; EFA extracted three factors and explained 61.816% of the total variance; CFA confirmed that all the goodness-of-fit indices were acceptable. The Cronbach’s alpha of the Chinese version of the NEDM-EOLCS was 0.962, and the retest reliability coefficient was 0.896. The Chinese version of NEDM-EOLCS had 55 items in 3 dimensions.
conclusionsThe Chinese version of NEDM-EOLCS is scientifically reasonable and has good reliability and validity. It can be used to investigate Chinese nurses’ ethical decision-making around end-of-life care.
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.