Construction of an evaluation index system for the innovativeness of nursing papers using the Delphi method

Objective： The goal of this study was to construct an evaluation index system for the innovativeness of nursing papers. Methods： A total of 17 nursing experts were consulted for two rounds, and the reliability and weight of the constructed evaluation index system for the innovativeness of nursing papers were determined. Results： An evaluation system for the innovativeness of nursing papers was constructed, including 3 primary indexes, 8 secondary indexes, 14 tertiary indexes, and 8 quaternary indexes. The 3 primary indexes with their weights were new argument （0.547）, new evidence （0.345）, and new conclusion （0.109）. Conclusions： The representativeness, the enthusiasm for the study, the degree of authority, the degree of coordination, and the convergence of the experts were high： therefore, an evaluation index system for the innovativeness of nursing papers based on the Delphi method can comprehensively and scientifically evaluate the innovativeness of nursing papers.

Training indicators and quantitative criteria for emergency nurse specialists

Objective： By constructing a training system of quality evaluation standards for emergency nurse specialist（ENS）, we can ensure smooth operations and quality training for ENS.Methods： First, the frame structure of indicators was designed on the basis of system theory and the balanced scorecard method. Meanwhile, corresponding quantitative standard indicators were compiled through literature analysis and a review of training characteristics. Next, screening indicators were collected through consultation with experts and statistical calculations. The indicators weight coefficient was calculated using the analytic hierarchy process（AHP）. Finally, indicators were validated in two groups of nurses in two different training courses.Results：（1） We created a three-level indicator system： level-Ⅰ dimensions have 4 indicators, while level-Ⅱ dimensions and level-Ⅲ dimensions have 13 and 34 indicators, respectively;（2） The coefficient of expert＇s judgment is 0.840, familiarity is 0.914 and authority is 0.877, and the three rounds of coordination coefficient are 0.456, 0.553 and 0.715, respectively;（3） There are at least 56 indicators in alternative quantitative standards; and（4） The alpha reliability value of the indicator system in the two training course had no significant difference（P 〉 0.05）. The same result was observed when examining two groups of nurses in one training course（P 〉 0.05）.Conclusions： This study established a training system of quality evaluation standards for emergency nurse specialists that is objective, reliable, easy to operate and representative according to scientific selection and verification. This system can therefore provide a basis for quality evaluation and targeted improvement for ENS training in addition to promoting health.

Research and perspectives on criteria for evaluation of nursing research achievements

This paper introduces concepts related to scientific research achievements, analyzes current evaluation methods with regard to nursing research achievements and their application at home and abroad, and summarizes findings from the investigation of obstacles to the application of nursing research results in China, aiming to provide reference points for the evaluation and application of nursing research results in China.

Reliability and validity of an indicator system for assessing the quality of ophthalmic nursing

Objective： The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of an indicator system for assessing the quality of ophthalmic nursing. Methods： A questionnaire-based study was performed for 218 individuals in clinical nursing manage- ment using this indicator system. The resulting data were compiled and analyzed using Excel 2003 and SPSS 13.0, and tests of reliability and validity were conducted. Results： The indicator system yielded an overall Cronbach＇s o value of 0.948, a test-retest reliability of 0.793, 3-dimensional Cronbach＇s o values of 0.870-0.930, and a content validity of 0.92. Exploratory factor analysis was then performed to extract three common factors, which generated a cumulative contribution rate of 54.04%. The load range of each factor was 0.43-0.83. Conclusions： The indicator system for evaluating the quality of ophthalmic nursing has favorable reli- ability and validity, which means that it is a suitable clinical tool for assessing the quality of ophthalmic