Back

Development and validation of a multiple-choice question-based delirium care knowledge quiz for critical care nurses

Ho, M.-H.

2021-01-20 nursing
10.1101/2021.01.16.21249923 medRxiv
Show abstract

AimsTo develop and psychometrically test a multiple choice questions (MCQs)-based quiz of delirium care knowledge for critical care nurses. DesignInstrument development and psychometric evaluation study. MethodsThe development and validation process including two phases. Phase I focused on the quiz development, conducted by the following steps: (1) generated initial 20-item pool; (2) examined content validity and (3) face validity; (4) conducted pilot testing, data were collected from 217 critical care nurses via online survey during 01 October to 07 November, 2020; (5) performed item analysis and eliminated items based on the item difficulty and discrimination indices. The MCQs quiz was finalised through the development process. Then, phases II emphasised the quiz validation, to estimate the internal consistency, split-half and test-retest reliability, and construct validity using parallel analysis with the exploratory factor analysis (EFA). ResultsA final 16-item MCQs quiz was emerged from the item analysis. The Kuder- Richardson Formula 20 coefficient for the overall quiz showed good internal consistency (0.85), and the intraclass correlation coefficient with a 30-day interval also indicated that the questionnaire had satisfactory stability (0.96). The EFA confirmed appropriate construct validity for the quiz, four factors could explain the total variance of 60.87%. ConclusionThis study developed the first MCQs quiz for delirium care knowledge and it is a reliable and valid tool that can be implemented to assess the level of delirium care knowledge. ImpactThis study offers an evidence-based quiz designed for future research and education purposes in delirium care that has significant implications for knowledge test by using MCQs in clinical practice.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.