ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Chinese adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the competence scale of actions of nurses in emergencies among emergency nurses.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To translate the Competence Scale of Actions of Nurses in Emergencies (CSANE) into Chinese and evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods: A total of 465 emergency department nurses from 10 tertiary hospitals in Xi'an, Shaanxi Province, China, participated in this study. The original CSANE was translated following Brislin's translation model, culturally adapted through expert consultation and pilot testing, and finalized as the Chinese CSANE. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha coefficients and split-half reliability. Validity was assessed through content validity, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Results: The Chinese CSANE comprises 7 dimensions and 78 items. Exploratory factor analysis extracted 7 common factors, accounting for 76.919% of cumulative variance. In confirmatory factor analysis, CMIN/DF was 1.736, RMR was 0.021, IFI was 0.953, TLI was 0.952, CFI was 0.953, and RMSEA was 0.040, whereas GFI and AGFI were 0.794 and 0.781, respectively. The AVE values ranged from 0.714 to 0.845, and the CR values ranged from 0.910 to 0.989. However, discriminant validity was insufficient because several inter-factor correlations exceeded the square roots of AVE. The total Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.994, and the split-half reliability was 0.975. Conclusion: The Chinese CSANE showed good internal consistency and acceptable structural validity among emergency nurses. However, the insufficient discriminant validity and high Cronbach's alpha coefficient suggest potential overlap among some dimensions and items. Further multicenter studies and item refinement are needed to improve its applicability and measurement precision. Contribution to patients or public: The Chinese CSANE may help nursing administrators understand emergency nurses' competency levels and training needs, and provide a basis for targeted training and management.
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.