ArticleBMC medical education2025
Design and validation of a comprehensive educational program for stroke nursing care: a mixed methods study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNurse education can assist in developing comprehensive stroke care. This study aimed to design and validate a comprehensive educational program for stroke nursing care.
methodsThis study employed a mixed-methods approach, emphasizing four of the six steps in Kern's model of educational program development (needs assessment, initial design, goals and specific objectives, and educational strategy). It was conducted at Shohadaye Tajrish, Loghman-e Hakim, and Imam Hossein Hospitals in Tehran during 2023-2024. The initial phase consisted of a comprehensive needs assessment, a literature review, in-depth interviews with twenty nurses and patients, a careful review of patient documents and medical records, as well as direct observations of patient care. The interviews were analyzed with MAXQDA 20 software using the conventional content analysis method. Validation was conducted through two Delphi rounds, with an agreement level of more than 70% based on the frequency of responses in each round.
resultsThrough the Delphi method, twenty experts participated in the evaluation and validation process. In the first round of Delphi, 30 learning topics achieved appropriate consensus (mean scores ranging from 2.33 to 3.55), while 2 topics (applying basic nursing concepts in patient care and providing nursing care based on the nursing process) were eliminated due to inappropriate consensus (mean scores ranging from 1 to 2.32). In the second Delphi round, the validation of the remaining 30 items was reexamined, which obtained an appropriate consensus. In the first round of the Delphi study, a significant Kendall's coefficient of concordance was observed (Kendall's W = 0.735, χ²=30.524, p < 0.01); however, after removing two items in the second round, this coefficient improved, indicating stronger agreement among the participants (Kendall's W = 0.755, χ²=31.624, p < 0.01).
conclusionThis study developed and validated an educational program focused on professional nursing care for stroke patients, recognizing the critical need for continuous education in the neurology department to update nurses' knowledge and skills with the most current care methods and information. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.