ArticleBMC medical education2026
Development and content validity of an educational manual on nursing care in blood transfusion.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blood transfusion is a frequent and high-risk clinical procedure that requires up-to-date technical knowledge and well-structured educational support to ensure patient safety. Despite its widespread use, there is a shortage of validated educational technologies specifically designed to support nursing education and professional training in transfusion care. This study aimed to develop and validate the content of an educational manual on nursing care in blood transfusion. Methodological study was conducted in two phases: development of the manual based on a scoping review and instructional design principles, followed by content validation by a panel of 15 expert nurses in transfusion and clinical nursing. Content validity was assessed using a structured instrument and the Content Validity Ratio (CVR). The manual was organized into ten thematic sections covering ethical, technical, and clinical aspects of transfusion care across all stages of the process. All evaluated items achieved CVR values ≥ 0.70, with most items presenting values close to 1.00, indicating high agreement regarding clarity, relevance, and practical applicability. The results demonstrate strong evidence of content validity, supporting the manual as a content-valid educational resource for nursing education. This educational resource has the potential to strengthen professional competencies, may support nursing education and contribute to safer transfusion practicesin healthcare settings.
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.