• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Reporting of instrument validity and reliability in selected clinical nursing journals, 1989.

作者信息

Selby-Harrington M L, Mehta S M, Jutsum V, Riportella-Muller R, Quade D

机构信息

School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Greensboro 27412.

出版信息

J Prof Nurs. 1994 Jan-Feb;10(1):47-56. doi: 10.1016/s8755-7223(05)80041-9.

DOI:10.1016/s8755-7223(05)80041-9
PMID:8144756
Abstract

Before research findings are applied to practice, the quality of the research must be assessed so that flawed research does not lead inadvertently to flawed practice. Two critical indicators of research quality are the validity and reliability of the data collection instruments. This article summarizes the principles of instrument validity and reliability and identifies deviations from these principles in a random sample of 55 research studies published in 1989 in five refereed nursing journals targeted toward practicing clinicians. Using a valid and reliable instrument, the investigators found that even with a policy of giving authors "the benefit of the doubt," 47% of the research studies contained no evidence of validity for any data collection instruments and 36% had no evidence of reliability; 29% had no evidence of either validity or reliability. Content validity, a basic requirement for all research instruments, was addressed in only 27% of the studies. This article provides documentation, justification, and suggestions for nursing educators, journal editors, and researchers to take action to improve the reporting of instrument validity and reliability to help ensure the quality of the research on which nursing practice is based.

摘要

相似文献

1
Reporting of instrument validity and reliability in selected clinical nursing journals, 1989.
J Prof Nurs. 1994 Jan-Feb;10(1):47-56. doi: 10.1016/s8755-7223(05)80041-9.
2
Evaluation of sampling methods in research reported in selected clinical nursing journals: implications for nursing practice.所选临床护理期刊报道的研究中抽样方法的评估:对护理实践的启示
J Prof Nurs. 1990 Mar-Apr;6(2):76-85. doi: 10.1016/s8755-7223(05)80086-9.
3
Use of physiologic variables in nursing research.生理变量在护理研究中的应用。
Image J Nurs Sch. 1995 Winter;27(4):273-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.1995.tb00887.x.
4
How valid and reliable are patient satisfaction data? An analysis of 195 studies.患者满意度数据的有效性和可靠性如何?对195项研究的分析。
Int J Qual Health Care. 1999 Aug;11(4):319-28. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/11.4.319.
5
Validity and reliability reporting practices in the field of health education and behavior: a review of seven journals.健康教育与行为领域的效度和信度报告实践:对七本期刊的综述
Health Educ Behav. 2014 Feb;41(1):12-8. doi: 10.1177/1090198113483139. Epub 2013 Apr 3.
6
The measurement of collaboration within healthcare settings: a systematic review of measurement properties of instruments.医疗机构内协作的测量:对测量工具属性的系统评价
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):138-97. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-2159.
7
Psychometric instrumentation: reliability and validity of instruments used for clinical practice, evidence-based practice projects and research studies.心理测量工具:用于临床实践、循证实践项目及研究的工具的信度与效度。
Clin Nurse Spec. 2015 May-Jun;29(3):134-8. doi: 10.1097/NUR.0000000000000131.
8
Instrument validity and reliability in three health education journals, 1980-1987.1980 - 1987年三本健康教育期刊中工具的有效性和可靠性
J Sch Health. 1989 Mar;59(3):105-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.1989.tb04673.x.
9
Parallels between research and diagnosis: the reliability and validity issues of clinical practice.
Nurse Pract. 1991 Oct;16(10):42, 45, 49-50.
10
A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability.用于测试效度和信度的心理测量工具箱。
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2007;39(2):155-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00161.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Development of the Values-Centered Assessment Tool (VCAT) to Inform Culturally Responsive Behavioral Services.以价值观为中心的评估工具(VCAT)的开发,为文化响应性行为服务提供信息。
Behav Anal Pract. 2024 Jul 15;17(4):977-995. doi: 10.1007/s40617-024-00945-x. eCollection 2024 Dec.
2
Predictive variables of prescription opioid misuse in patients with chronic noncancer pain. Development of a risk detection scale: A registered report protocol.预测慢性非癌痛患者处方阿片类药物滥用的变量。风险检测量表的开发:一项注册报告方案。
PLoS One. 2021 May 13;16(5):e0251586. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251586. eCollection 2021.
3
Reporting characteristics of cancer pain: a systematic review and quantitative analysis of research publications in palliative care journals.
癌症疼痛的报告特征:姑息治疗期刊中研究出版物的系统评价与定量分析
Indian J Palliat Care. 2011 Jan;17(1):57-66. doi: 10.4103/0973-1075.78451.