护士良心反对态度量表(COAS-N)的编制、信度和效度。

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS BMC Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2024-12-21 DOI:10.1186/s12910-024-01155-4
Seyhan Demir Karabulut, Şenay Gül, Eylem Gül Ateş, Zehra Göçmen Baykara
{"title":"护士良心反对态度量表(COAS-N)的编制、信度和效度。","authors":"Seyhan Demir Karabulut, Şenay Gül, Eylem Gül Ateş, Zehra Göçmen Baykara","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01155-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Conscientious objection poses ethical dilemmas frequently encountered by nurses, allowing them to prioritize personal beliefs in caregiving. However, it may also be viewed as a stance jeopardizing patients' healthcare access. There is no measurement tool to measure conscientious objection in nurses. This study aimed to develop a measurement tool for nurses' conscientious objection attitudes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This research is a methodological study conducted with a total of 261 nurses in Turkiye. Following content validity assessments by ten experts, a 29-item draft scale was developed. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses examined the factor structure, and reliability was assessed via the Spearman-Brown coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Bland Altman plot. Cronbach's alpha estimated internal consistency and discrimination, which were evaluated by comparing lower and upper 27% groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Nurses' Conscientious Objection Attitude Scale (COAS-N) comprises 29 items and three sub-dimensions (prioritizing professional values, prioritizing personal values, and requesting the right to conscientious objection). Cronbach's alpha for the entire scale is 0.81.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Validity and reliability were established for the newly developed scale measuring nurses' conscientious objection attitudes.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"25 1","pages":"147"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11662762/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development, reliability, and validity of the nurses' conscientious objection attitude scale (COAS-N).\",\"authors\":\"Seyhan Demir Karabulut, Şenay Gül, Eylem Gül Ateş, Zehra Göçmen Baykara\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12910-024-01155-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Conscientious objection poses ethical dilemmas frequently encountered by nurses, allowing them to prioritize personal beliefs in caregiving. However, it may also be viewed as a stance jeopardizing patients' healthcare access. There is no measurement tool to measure conscientious objection in nurses. This study aimed to develop a measurement tool for nurses' conscientious objection attitudes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This research is a methodological study conducted with a total of 261 nurses in Turkiye. Following content validity assessments by ten experts, a 29-item draft scale was developed. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses examined the factor structure, and reliability was assessed via the Spearman-Brown coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Bland Altman plot. Cronbach's alpha estimated internal consistency and discrimination, which were evaluated by comparing lower and upper 27% groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Nurses' Conscientious Objection Attitude Scale (COAS-N) comprises 29 items and three sub-dimensions (prioritizing professional values, prioritizing personal values, and requesting the right to conscientious objection). Cronbach's alpha for the entire scale is 0.81.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Validity and reliability were established for the newly developed scale measuring nurses' conscientious objection attitudes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"147\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11662762/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01155-4\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01155-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:良心反对提出伦理困境经常遇到护士,使他们优先考虑个人信仰护理。然而,这也可能被视为一种危及患者获得医疗保健的立场。没有测量工具来衡量护士的良心反对。本研究旨在开发一种测量护士良心反对态度的工具。方法:对土耳其261名护士进行方法学研究。经过10位专家的内容效度评估,制定了一份包含29个项目的量表草案。探索性和验证性因子分析检验了因子结构,并通过Spearman-Brown系数、类内相关系数(ICC)和Bland Altman图评估了信度。Cronbach's alpha估计内部一致性和歧视,通过比较低27%和高27%的组来评估。结果:护士良心拒服兵役态度量表(COAS-N)包含29个条目和3个子维度(优先考虑职业价值、优先考虑个人价值和要求良心拒服兵役权)。整个量表的Cronbach's alpha为0.81。结论:新编制的护士良心反对态度量表具有良好的信度和效度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Development, reliability, and validity of the nurses' conscientious objection attitude scale (COAS-N).

Background: Conscientious objection poses ethical dilemmas frequently encountered by nurses, allowing them to prioritize personal beliefs in caregiving. However, it may also be viewed as a stance jeopardizing patients' healthcare access. There is no measurement tool to measure conscientious objection in nurses. This study aimed to develop a measurement tool for nurses' conscientious objection attitudes.

Methods: This research is a methodological study conducted with a total of 261 nurses in Turkiye. Following content validity assessments by ten experts, a 29-item draft scale was developed. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses examined the factor structure, and reliability was assessed via the Spearman-Brown coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Bland Altman plot. Cronbach's alpha estimated internal consistency and discrimination, which were evaluated by comparing lower and upper 27% groups.

Results: The Nurses' Conscientious Objection Attitude Scale (COAS-N) comprises 29 items and three sub-dimensions (prioritizing professional values, prioritizing personal values, and requesting the right to conscientious objection). Cronbach's alpha for the entire scale is 0.81.

Conclusion: Validity and reliability were established for the newly developed scale measuring nurses' conscientious objection attitudes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
期刊最新文献
Aesthetic dentistry and ethics: a systematic review of marketing practices and overtreatment in cosmetic dental procedures. Shared decision-making between patients and healthcare providers at rural health facilities in Eastern Uganda: an exploratory qualitative study. Ethical issues raised in the care of the elderly during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and possible solutions for the future: a systematic review of qualitative scientific literature. Lay views in Southern France of the acceptability of refusing to provide treatment because of alleged futility. Students' attitudes toward euthanasia and abortion: a cross-cultural study in three Mediterranean countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1