Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background And Purpose: Conceptual research utilization (CRU) is one indicator of an optimum practice environment that leads to improved patient and organizational outcomes. Yet, its measurement has not been adequately addressed. In this study, we investigated precision of scores obtained with a new CRU scale using item response theory (IRT) methods.
Methods: We analyzed the responses from 1,349 health care aides from 30 Canadian nursing homes using Samejima's (1969, 1996) graded response model (GRM).
Results: Findings suggest that the CRU scale is most precise at low to average trait levels with significantly less precision at higher trait levels.
Conclusions: The scale showed acceptable precision at low to average trait levels. New items and/or different response options that capture higher trait levels are needed. Future development of the scale is discussed.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1891/1061-3749.22.1.145 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!