4.3 Article

Translation, Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Nurses Self-Concept Instrument (NSCI) to Spanish

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20021529

关键词

self-concept; leadership; nurses; validation; Spanish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to translate, culturally adapt and validate the Spanish version of the Nurses Self-Concept Instrument in a sample of 483 Spanish registered nurses. Gender differences were found in the Nurse Thinking and Perception of Capabilities dimensions, with higher scores for women, and in the Leadership dimension, with higher scores for men. While the Spanish version of the Nurses Self-Concept Instrument is a valid and reliable tool, the differences in its dimensions provide a deeper understanding of cultural differences in professional self-concept.
Professional self-concept in nurses is understood as the way nurses think and feel about themselves in their nursing role and is both a predictor of quality of care and a protective factor against burnout. The aim of this study was to translate, culturally adapt and validate the Spanish version of the Nurses Self-Concept Instrument in a sample of 483 Spanish registered nurses. In addition, we analyzed gender differences in its dimensions in the same sample. Internal reliability was evaluated using Cronbach's Alpha, while construct validity was assessed using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. The differences between groups were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Factor distribution was different from the original model. A gender gap was observed in the Nurse Thinking and Perception of Capabilities dimensions with higher values in the women group, while in the Leadership dimension, higher values were observed in the men group. While the Spanish version of the Nurses Self-Concept Instrument is a valid and reliable tool to measure this construct, the differences in its dimensions lead to a deeper understanding of the cultural differences in the construction of professional self-concept.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据