{"title":"临床模拟量表中土耳其语版学习流的心理测量特性。","authors":"Azzet Yüksel, Nehir Demirel, Yeliz Çulha, Funda Büyükyilmaz","doi":"10.1097/jnr.0000000000000673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Students must be able to accept the unrealistic aspects of clinical simulations to ensure these simulations are effective learning tools. As the flow during simulation must be measured to determine simulation learning effectiveness, a reliable measurement tool is needed.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study was carried out to translate the Learning Flow in Clinical Simulation Scale (LFCSS) into Turkish and then to validate it on a sample of nurses in Turkey.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A methodological research approach was used, and 135 nursing students with prior experience engaging with clinical simulations were recruited and enrolled as participants. The data were collected using two forms, i.e., the Student Information Form, LFCSS (Turkish version) and The Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified. Content validity was evaluated using a content validity index (CVI) based on expert opinions. The correlation between the two forms was calculated using the equivalent (parallel) forms method, and reliability and internal consistency were examined using the Cronbach alpha coefficient and item analysis. The construct validity of the scale was determined using factor analysis with varimax rotation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Cronbach alpha coefficient was .93 for the entire LFCSS, with item-total score correlations ranging between .922 and .745. In terms of equivalent (parallel) forms reliability, a low correlation (r = .389) was found with the Flow Scale in Clinical Simulation and Prebriefing subdimension of the Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified, and a moderate correlation (r = .467, r = .584, r = .447) was found with the Learning, Confidence, and Debriefing subdimensions of the same. The factor analysis showed a four-factor structure explaining 74.13% of the total variance, which is similar to the original scale. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value was .890 and the Bartlett's test chi-square value was 1455.35 with a p < .001 significance level.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings indicate the Turkish version of the LFCSS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing level of student/participant flow in clinical simulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94242,"journal":{"name":"The journal of nursing research : JNR","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Learning Flow in Clinical Simulation Scale.\",\"authors\":\"Azzet Yüksel, Nehir Demirel, Yeliz Çulha, Funda Büyükyilmaz\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/jnr.0000000000000673\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Students must be able to accept the unrealistic aspects of clinical simulations to ensure these simulations are effective learning tools. As the flow during simulation must be measured to determine simulation learning effectiveness, a reliable measurement tool is needed.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study was carried out to translate the Learning Flow in Clinical Simulation Scale (LFCSS) into Turkish and then to validate it on a sample of nurses in Turkey.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A methodological research approach was used, and 135 nursing students with prior experience engaging with clinical simulations were recruited and enrolled as participants. The data were collected using two forms, i.e., the Student Information Form, LFCSS (Turkish version) and The Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified. Content validity was evaluated using a content validity index (CVI) based on expert opinions. The correlation between the two forms was calculated using the equivalent (parallel) forms method, and reliability and internal consistency were examined using the Cronbach alpha coefficient and item analysis. The construct validity of the scale was determined using factor analysis with varimax rotation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Cronbach alpha coefficient was .93 for the entire LFCSS, with item-total score correlations ranging between .922 and .745. In terms of equivalent (parallel) forms reliability, a low correlation (r = .389) was found with the Flow Scale in Clinical Simulation and Prebriefing subdimension of the Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified, and a moderate correlation (r = .467, r = .584, r = .447) was found with the Learning, Confidence, and Debriefing subdimensions of the same. The factor analysis showed a four-factor structure explaining 74.13% of the total variance, which is similar to the original scale. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value was .890 and the Bartlett's test chi-square value was 1455.35 with a p < .001 significance level.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings indicate the Turkish version of the LFCSS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing level of student/participant flow in clinical simulation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94242,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of nursing research : JNR\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of nursing research : JNR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000673\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of nursing research : JNR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000673","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:学生必须能够接受临床模拟的不现实方面,以确保这些模拟是有效的学习工具。为了确定模拟学习的有效性,必须对模拟过程中的流量进行测量,因此需要可靠的测量工具。目的:本研究将临床模拟量表(LFCSS)翻译成土耳其语,然后在土耳其的护士样本中进行验证。方法:采用方法学研究方法,招募135名有临床模拟经验的护理专业学生作为研究对象。数据收集使用两种表格,即学生信息表,LFCSS(土耳其版)和模拟有效性工具-修改。采用基于专家意见的内容效度指数(CVI)评价内容效度。采用等效(平行)表格法计算两种表格之间的相关性,并采用Cronbach alpha系数和项目分析检验信度和内部一致性。采用变量旋转因子分析确定量表的构念效度。结果:整个LFCSS的Cronbach alpha系数为0.93,项目总分的相关系数为0.922 ~ 0.745。在等效(平行)表格信度方面,与临床模拟流程量表和模拟效能工具改良版的事前简报子维度呈低相关(r = .389),与学习、信心和事前简报子维度呈中等相关(r = .467, r = .584, r = .447)。因子分析显示,四因子结构解释了总方差的74.13%,与原量表相似。Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin值为0.890,Bartlett检验卡方值为1455.35,显著性水平p < 0.001。结论:研究结果表明,土耳其版本的LFCSS是评估临床模拟中学生/参与者流动水平的可靠和有效的工具。
Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Learning Flow in Clinical Simulation Scale.
Background: Students must be able to accept the unrealistic aspects of clinical simulations to ensure these simulations are effective learning tools. As the flow during simulation must be measured to determine simulation learning effectiveness, a reliable measurement tool is needed.
Purpose: This study was carried out to translate the Learning Flow in Clinical Simulation Scale (LFCSS) into Turkish and then to validate it on a sample of nurses in Turkey.
Methods: A methodological research approach was used, and 135 nursing students with prior experience engaging with clinical simulations were recruited and enrolled as participants. The data were collected using two forms, i.e., the Student Information Form, LFCSS (Turkish version) and The Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified. Content validity was evaluated using a content validity index (CVI) based on expert opinions. The correlation between the two forms was calculated using the equivalent (parallel) forms method, and reliability and internal consistency were examined using the Cronbach alpha coefficient and item analysis. The construct validity of the scale was determined using factor analysis with varimax rotation.
Results: The Cronbach alpha coefficient was .93 for the entire LFCSS, with item-total score correlations ranging between .922 and .745. In terms of equivalent (parallel) forms reliability, a low correlation (r = .389) was found with the Flow Scale in Clinical Simulation and Prebriefing subdimension of the Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified, and a moderate correlation (r = .467, r = .584, r = .447) was found with the Learning, Confidence, and Debriefing subdimensions of the same. The factor analysis showed a four-factor structure explaining 74.13% of the total variance, which is similar to the original scale. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value was .890 and the Bartlett's test chi-square value was 1455.35 with a p < .001 significance level.
Conclusions: The findings indicate the Turkish version of the LFCSS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing level of student/participant flow in clinical simulation.