Clinical Decision-Making in Nursing Scale (CDMNS-PT©) in nursing students: translation and validation

Abstract

Objectives: to validate, for the Portuguese population, the Clinical Decision-Making Nursing Scale© (CDMNS©). Methods: this methodological study involved 496 nursing students who filled in a questionnaire created using sociodemographic and academic data, and the scale to evaluate the making of decisions in nursing. Results: the confirmatory factorial analysis showed that the adjustment of the factorial structure has good quality, being made up by three factors (X2/gl = 2.056; GFI = 0.927; CFI = 0.917; RMSEA = 0.046; RMR = 0.039; SRMR = 0.050). For the scale to be reliable, it had to include only the reliability of the scale required it to be constituted by 23 items, with correlation values that varied from 0.184 and 0.610, and a global Cronbach's Alpha of 0.851, which showed its good reliability. Conclusions: the CDMNS-PT© is valid and reliable, showing a high potential to be used in clinical practice and investigation.

Measurement properties of self-reported clinical decision-making instruments in nursing: A COSMIN systematic review

“…Among the nine instruments, five were original, and four were translations or adaptations of the five originals. Two instruments ( Jenkins, 1985 ; Lauri and Salanterä, 1995 ) were published before the 2000s, one between 2000 and 2010 ( Kelly, 2009 ), and six ( Albanesi et al., 2021 ; Duarte and Dixe, 2021 ; Kawase et al., 2021 ; Kouravand et al., 2021 ; Liou et al., 2016 ; White, 2014 ) after 2010.…”

“…The five original instruments are the Clinical Decision-Making in Nursing Scale (CDMNS; English) ( Jenkins, 1985 ), the Clinical Judgement Scale (CJS; Japanese) ( Kawase et al., 2021 ), the Nursing Anxiety and Self-Confidence with Clinical Decision-Making (NASC—CDM; English) ( White, 2014 ), the Nurses Clinical Reasoning Scale (NCRS, Chinese) ( Liou et al., 2016 ), and the Nursing Decision-Making Instrument (NDMI; English) ( Gilje and Klose, 2000 ; Lauri and Salanterä, 1995 , 2002 ). The CDMNS was adapted ( Kelly, 2009 ) and translated into Portuguese ( Duarte and Dixe, 2021 ) and Persian ( Kouravand et al., 2021 ) for a total of four versions. The NDMI was adapted and translated into Italian ( Albanesi et al., 2021 ) for a total of two versions.…”

“…Still, they did not provide sufficient information on the process (e.g., involvement of skilled interviewers, achievement of data saturation), which yielded "doubtful" ratings. Similarly, five studies ( Duarte and Dixe, 2021 ; Jenkins, 1985 ; Kawase et al., 2021 ; Kouravand et al., 2021 ; Lauri and Salanterä, 1995 ) employed cognitive interviews or pilot tests with nurses or nursing students to assess item comprehensiveness and comprehensibility. However, missing information yielded "doubtful" or "inadequate" ratings.…”

“… Doubtful Not in line with 1 hypothesis (-) Very good α = 0.83 (+) – – CDMNS (English-adapted) ( Kelly, 2009 ) 158 Adequate (?) – – Very good α = 0.81 (+) – – CDMNS (Portuguese) ( Duarte and Dixe, 2021 ) 496 Very good CFI = 0.91 RMSEA = 0.04 SRMR = 0.05 (+) – – Very good α >0.66 (-) – – CDMNS (Persian) ( Kouravand et al., 2021 ) 300 Very good CFI = 0.93 RMSEA = 0.07 SRMR = 0.06 (-) – – Very good α >0.72 (+) Adequate ICC = 0.87 (+) CJS (Japanese) ( Kawase et al., 2021 ) 610 Very good CFI = 0.93 RMSEA = 0.07 (-) – – Very good α >0.92 (+) – – NASC—CDM (English) ( White, 2014 ) 242 Adequate (?) Doubtful In line with two hypotheses (+) Inadequate (?)…”

Implications of clinical simulation in motivation for learning: scoping review

“…(44,45) In a simulation, they are developed through communication skills, work organization, teamwork, and critical thinking, among others, which gives the opportunity to analyze problems from multiple perspectives and positively impacts clinical reasoning and decision-making processes. (46) Soft skills involve self-awareness, decision-making and emotional management, critical and reflective thinking, empathy, problem-solving, teamwork, effective communication, self-efficacy, self-confidence, creativity, cooperation, negotiation, self-management, resilience, and respect for diversity. (45) They complement hard skills and allow students to resolutely deal with professional and everyday life challenges.…”