ArticleJournal of nursing management2026
Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the Nurse's Spiritual Sensitivity Scale.
Article in Journal of nursing management, 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.
- Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the Nurse's Spiritual Sensitivity Scale.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNurses' spiritual sensitivity refers to the ability to identify the spiritual needs of patients and their families and to address these needs through ethical decision-making in clinical practice. However, there are currently no validated instruments to measure the spiritual sensitivity of Chinese nurses.
aimsThis study aimed to adapt the Nurses' Spiritual Sensitivity Scale (NSSS) into Chinese and to evaluate its reliability and validity among Chinese nurses.
methodsAfter forward translation, back-translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and expert consultation, a Chinese version of the NSSS was developed. In a cross-sectional study, a total of 508 nurses were recruited from two hospitals to evaluate the instrument's psychometric properties. Content validity was assessed using the content validity index (CVI), and structural validity was evaluated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (n = 303) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (n = 205). Reliability was examined using Cronbach's α coefficient for internal consistency and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for test-retest reliability.
resultsThe Chinese version of the NSSS comprises 20 items across two dimensions: professional spiritual sensitivity and inner spiritual sensitivity. The item-level CVI (I-CVI) ranged from 0.833 to 1.000; the scale-level CVI (S-CVI) was 0.900, and the average S-CVI was 0.983. EFA (n = 303) extracted two factors, with a cumulative variance explained of 61.658%. CFA (n = 205) supported a two-dimensional structure. The overall Cronbach's α coefficient of the scale was 0.927, and the test-retest reliability coefficient was 0.911. For the two dimensions, the Cronbach's α coefficients were 0.943 and 0.914, and the test-retest reliability coefficients were 0.867 and 0.935.
conclusionsThe Chinese version of the NSSS is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the spiritual sensitivity of Chinese nurses. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The validated Chinese NSSS offers potential utility for screening training needs, evaluating educational interventions, and guiding clinical supervision in spiritual 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.