ArticleBMC nursing2026
Assessing professional values in nursing education: adaptation and validation of the Hong Kong nurses professional values scale - revised (HK-NPVS-R).
Article in BMC 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProfessional values are central to nursing practice and education, yet their measurement requires culturally adapted instruments. Despite the importance of these values, the NPVS-R has not been systematically validated in the Hong Kong context. This study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a Hong Kong version of the Nurses Professional Values Scale-Revised (HK-NPVS-R) among nursing students.
methodsA methodological cross-sectional design was used, with a total of 1,623 nursing students recruited from eight institutions representing all major categories of nursing education providers in Hong Kong. The NPVS-R was translated into traditional Chinese using forward-backward translation. Content validity was evaluated by eight nursing experts. Construct validity was examined through principal component analysis (PCA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Measurement invariance was tested across gender, age groups, program types, and academic years.
resultsPCA revealed a three-factor structure — Caring, Professionalism, and Activism — explaining 63.17% of total variance. CFA indicated good model fit (CFI = 0.940; TLI = 0.934; RMSEA = 0.042 [90% CI: 0.040, 0.045]). The HK-NPVS-R demonstrated excellent reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.96). Measurement invariance analyses confirmed stability of the factor structure across all demographic subgroups.
conclusionsThe HK-NPVS-R exhibits strong psychometric properties and cultural relevance. It is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing professional values among Hong Kong nursing students, supporting both research and educational applications. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.