期刊文献+

中文版第二受害者经历与支持测评量表信度效度检验 被引量:32

Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的:翻译、修订第二受害者经历与支持测评量表(Second Victim Experience and SupportTool, SVEST)并分析其信度、效度。方法:对SVEST进行跨文化调试,形成中文版SVEST,利用SVEST问卷调查382名护士,测量其心理学特征。结果:探索性因子分析共提取6个公因子,累计方差贡献率为69.985%。总量表Cronbach's α系数为0.824,各维度Cronbach's α系数介于0.666 0.910,重测信度为0.888。结论:中文版SVEST量表具有较好的信度、效度,可作为研究我国医疗机构第二受害者的测评工具。 Objective: To translate and revise the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST), and analyze its reliability and validity. Methods: The SVEST was cross-culturally adapted to form a Chinese version of SVEST, which was used to investigate 382 medical staff of their psychological properties. Results: Exploratory factor analysis extracted 6 common factors, and the cumulative variance contribution rate was 69.985%. The Cronbach's α coefficient and the test-retest reliability of the total scale was 0.824 and 0.888, respectively. The Cronbach's α coefficient of each dimension was between 0.666 and 0.910. Conclusion: The Chinese version of the SVEST scale has good reliability and validity, and it can be used as a testing tool for the study of the second victims of medical institutions in China.
作者 陈娇娇 杨巧 赵庆华 郑双江 肖明朝 CHEN Jiaojiao;YANG Qiao;ZHAO Qinghua;ZHENG Shuangjiang;XIAO Mingzhao(Urology Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China)
出处 《中国护理管理》 CSCD 北大核心 2019年第7期991-995,共5页 Chinese Nursing Management
基金 重庆市科卫联合医学科研项目(2018QNXM010) 重庆市渝中区软科学研究项目(20170417) 重庆医科大学附属第一医院管理科研基金(GLJJ2016-18)
关键词 第二受害者 测评量表 信度 效度 second victim assessment scale reliability validity
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献30

  • 1Wynd CA,Schmidt B,Schaefer MA.Two quantitative approachesfor estimating content validity[J].Western J Nurs Res,2003,25(5):508–518.
  • 2Lindell MK,Brandt CJ,Whitney DJ.A revised index of interrateragreement for multi-item ratings of a single target[J].Appl PsycholMeasurem,1999,23(2):127–135.
  • 3Lawshe CH.A quantitative approach to content validity[J].Personne Psychol,1975,28(4):563–575.
  • 4Hambleton RK,Swaminathan H,Algina J,et al.Criterion-referencedtesting and measurement:Review of technical issues anddevelopments[J].Rev Educat Res,1978,48(1):11–22.
  • 5Martuza VR.Applying norm-referenced and criterion-referenced measurement in education[M].Boston:Allyn andBacon,1977:275–293.
  • 6Lynn MR.Determination and quantification of content validity[J].Nursing Res,1986,35(6):382–385.
  • 7Davis LL.Instrument review:Getting the most from your panel ofexperts[J].Appl Nurs Res,1992,5(4):194–197.
  • 8Polit DF,Beck CT.The content validity index:are you sure youknow what’s being reported?critique and recommendations[J].Res Nurs Health,2006,29(5):489–497.
  • 9Nora JJ.Causes old and new modes,mechanisms and models.Am Heart J,1993,125:1409
  • 10Hoffman JIE.Congenital heart disease:incidence and inheritance.Ped Clin North Am,1990,37:25

共引文献1119

同被引文献258

引证文献32

二级引证文献117

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部