| Titre : | Contributions of nursing students during their clinical practice in primary care: Adaptation and validation of a scale (2022) |
| Auteurs : | J. Díaz-Alonso ; Ana Fernandez-Feito ; M. João Forjaz ; E. Andina-Díaz ; E. García-Cueto ; A. Lana |
| Type de document : | Article |
| Dans : | Nurse Education in Practice (Vol. 65, November 2022) |
| Article en page(s) : | 103496 |
| Note générale : | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103496 |
| Langues: | Anglais |
| Descripteurs : |
HE Vinci Élève infirmier ; Enquêtes et questionnaires ; Etudes de validation ; Soins de santé primaires ; Soins infirmiers ; Stage de formation clinique |
| Mots-clés: | Participation de l'élève infirmiers ; Soins infirmiers basés sur les données probantes |
| Résumé : | Aim To adapt the ?Nursing Student Contributions to Clinical Settings? scale (CEEEC, Spanish acronym), designed for specialized care and to evaluate the validity and reliability of a measure in the primary health care setting. Additionally, a description of the contributions of nursing students to primary health care in Spain is presented, based on the perception of preceptor nurses. Methods A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted in Spain, involving a committee of nursing experts who participated in a Delphi panel (n = 5) and cognitive interviews (n = 5) and a sample of nursing preceptors (n = 300) from 57 primary health care centers (2019?2020). The CEEEC was reviewed by experts for the conceptual semantic adequacy of the 24 items for its application in primary health care. Nurse preceptors? responses to the CEEEC scale were used to study the validity and reliability of the measure, including factor analysis, convergent validity with the Health Sciences-Evidence Based Practice scale and a matched test-retest over a three-week interval. Results According to the consensus of experts, the CEEEC scale is valid for primary health care with minimal modifications (change "patient" to "user"). Based on the analysis of responses to the scale, the corrected item-total correlations of the 24 items were ? 0.40 and were grouped into a single factor, explaining 46.3% of the variance. The Cronbach's alpha value was 0.95. Regarding convergent validity, there was a positive correlation between the CEEEC scale and the score of the Health Sciences-Evidence Based Practice scale (Pearson?s coefficient= 0.33; p |
| Disponible en ligne : | Oui |
| En ligne : | https://login.ezproxy.vinci.be/login?url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471595322002104 |
Bibliothèques HE Vinci
