对企图私奔风险的护理诊断:内容验证研究。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING
Ester M Borba, Cássia T Santos, Amália de Fátima Lucena
{"title":"对企图私奔风险的护理诊断:内容验证研究。","authors":"Ester M Borba, Cássia T Santos, Amália de Fátima Lucena","doi":"10.1111/2047-3095.12494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to validate the content of the nursing diagnosis (ND) \"Risk for elopement attempt\" and increase its level of evidence (LOE) in the NANDA International (NANDA-I) Classification.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A content validity study was conducted based on expert opinions. The sample consisted of 33 experts with academic training in nursing and practical and theoretical experience concerning the nursing process. Data collection was performed using a Google Forms® questionnaire, which was electronically sent to the experts. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, and the diagnostic content validity was based on the Fehring model. This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the institution.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The title and definition of the ND under investigation were validated, along with 15 risk factors. Among these, \"Substance misuse\" was classified as major (0.96), whereas the others were validated as minor. Of the 13 risk populations, 6 were validated and classified as major, such as \"Individuals with history of elopement\" (0.90); 6 were validated and classified as minor, including \"Individuals with a history of nonadherence to treatment regimen\" (0.79); and \"Economically disadvantaged individuals\" were discarded (0.46). Of the three associated conditions, one was validated as major, namely, \"Mental disorders\" (0.86), whereas the other two were classified as minor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study validated the content of the \"Risk for elopement attempt\" ND, allowing it to be assigned a higher LOE based on the nursing experts. All components were validated except for one of the associated conditions.</p><p><strong>Implications for nursing practice: </strong>The validated ND will be submitted to NANDA-I, enabling it to achieve a higher LOE in the classification. This update will enhance the quality of this diagnostic classification and, consequently, patient care and nursing education and research.</p>","PeriodicalId":49051,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Nursing Knowledge","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nursing diagnosis of risk for elopement attempt: A content validation study.\",\"authors\":\"Ester M Borba, Cássia T Santos, Amália de Fátima Lucena\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/2047-3095.12494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to validate the content of the nursing diagnosis (ND) \\\"Risk for elopement attempt\\\" and increase its level of evidence (LOE) in the NANDA International (NANDA-I) Classification.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A content validity study was conducted based on expert opinions. The sample consisted of 33 experts with academic training in nursing and practical and theoretical experience concerning the nursing process. Data collection was performed using a Google Forms® questionnaire, which was electronically sent to the experts. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, and the diagnostic content validity was based on the Fehring model. This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the institution.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The title and definition of the ND under investigation were validated, along with 15 risk factors. Among these, \\\"Substance misuse\\\" was classified as major (0.96), whereas the others were validated as minor. Of the 13 risk populations, 6 were validated and classified as major, such as \\\"Individuals with history of elopement\\\" (0.90); 6 were validated and classified as minor, including \\\"Individuals with a history of nonadherence to treatment regimen\\\" (0.79); and \\\"Economically disadvantaged individuals\\\" were discarded (0.46). Of the three associated conditions, one was validated as major, namely, \\\"Mental disorders\\\" (0.86), whereas the other two were classified as minor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study validated the content of the \\\"Risk for elopement attempt\\\" ND, allowing it to be assigned a higher LOE based on the nursing experts. All components were validated except for one of the associated conditions.</p><p><strong>Implications for nursing practice: </strong>The validated ND will be submitted to NANDA-I, enabling it to achieve a higher LOE in the classification. This update will enhance the quality of this diagnostic classification and, consequently, patient care and nursing education and research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49051,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Nursing Knowledge\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Nursing Knowledge\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/2047-3095.12494\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Nursing Knowledge","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/2047-3095.12494","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在验证护理诊断(ND)"企图逃跑的风险 "的内容,并提高其在 NANDA 国际(NANDA-I)分类中的证据级别(LOE):方法:根据专家意见进行内容效度研究。研究样本由 33 名专家组成,他们均接受过护理方面的学术培训,并具有与护理过程相关的实践和理论经验。数据收集使用 Google Forms® 问卷,并以电子方式发送给专家。数据分析包括描述性统计,诊断内容效度基于费林模型。本研究获得了该机构研究伦理委员会的批准:调查中的玖瑰病的名称和定义以及 15 个风险因素均得到了验证。其中,"药物滥用 "被归类为主要因素(0.96),而其他因素被确认为次要因素。在 13 个风险人群中,有 6 个被验证并归类为主要风险人群,如 "有离家出走史的人"(0.90);有 6 个被验证并归类为次要风险人群,包括 "有不遵守治疗方案史的人"(0.79);"经济条件较差的人 "被放弃(0.46)。在三个相关条件中,有一个被验证为主要条件,即 "精神障碍"(0.86),而另外两个被归类为次要条件:本研究验证了 "企图私奔风险 "玖级指标的内容,使其在护理专家的基础上被赋予了更高的LOE。除了一个相关条件外,所有内容都得到了验证:经过验证的 ND 将提交给 NANDA-I,使其在分类中获得更高的 LOE。此次更新将提高该诊断分类的质量,进而提高患者护理和护理教育与研究的质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Nursing diagnosis of risk for elopement attempt: A content validation study.

Purpose: This study aimed to validate the content of the nursing diagnosis (ND) "Risk for elopement attempt" and increase its level of evidence (LOE) in the NANDA International (NANDA-I) Classification.

Method: A content validity study was conducted based on expert opinions. The sample consisted of 33 experts with academic training in nursing and practical and theoretical experience concerning the nursing process. Data collection was performed using a Google Forms® questionnaire, which was electronically sent to the experts. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, and the diagnostic content validity was based on the Fehring model. This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the institution.

Findings: The title and definition of the ND under investigation were validated, along with 15 risk factors. Among these, "Substance misuse" was classified as major (0.96), whereas the others were validated as minor. Of the 13 risk populations, 6 were validated and classified as major, such as "Individuals with history of elopement" (0.90); 6 were validated and classified as minor, including "Individuals with a history of nonadherence to treatment regimen" (0.79); and "Economically disadvantaged individuals" were discarded (0.46). Of the three associated conditions, one was validated as major, namely, "Mental disorders" (0.86), whereas the other two were classified as minor.

Conclusions: This study validated the content of the "Risk for elopement attempt" ND, allowing it to be assigned a higher LOE based on the nursing experts. All components were validated except for one of the associated conditions.

Implications for nursing practice: The validated ND will be submitted to NANDA-I, enabling it to achieve a higher LOE in the classification. This update will enhance the quality of this diagnostic classification and, consequently, patient care and nursing education and research.

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
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Nursing Knowledge, the official journal of NANDA International, is a peer-reviewed publication for key professionals committed to discovering, understanding and disseminating nursing knowledge. The Journal aims to clarify the knowledge base of nursing and improve patient safety by developing and disseminating nursing diagnoses and standardized nursing languages, and promoting their clinical use. It seeks to encourage education in clinical reasoning, diagnosis, and assessment and ensure global consistency in conceptual languages. The International Journal of Nursing Knowledge is an essential information resource for healthcare professionals concerned with developing nursing knowledge and /or clinical applications of standardized nursing languages in nursing research, education, practice, and policy. The Journal accepts papers which contribute significantly to international nursing knowledge, including concept analyses, original and applied research, review articles and international and historical perspectives, and welcomes articles discussing clinical challenges and guidelines, education initiatives, and policy initiatives.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信