ArticleBMC nursing2026
Psychometric evaluation of the current geriatric Institutional assessment profile: a tool for age-friendly care evaluation.
Article in BMC nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssessing institutional readiness and geriatric care practices is critical for hospitals striving to become age-friendly. The Geriatric Institutional Assessment Profile (GIAP) evaluates hospital-based age-friendly care, emphasizing nurses’ knowledge, attitudes, and practice environment. However, the development of new versions and translations of the instrument requires a re-evaluation of its factor structure and psychometric properties to ensure effectiveness in evolving healthcare systems and applicability across diverse settings.
objectiveTo evaluate the psychometric properties of the current updated GIAP, using the Hebrew translation version, including construct validity, reliability, and item-level performance.
methodsA survey-based design was employed, involving 346 nurses from two hospitals, employed in departments caring for patients aged 65 and older. Psychometric evaluations included exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess construct validity for the Geriatric Care Environment (GCE) scale and item analysis comprising difficulty, discrimination, and distractor effectiveness analysis for the general Geriatric Knowledge (GK) scale and Clinical Geriatric Knowledge (CGK) scale.
resultsEFA identified four factors explaining 46.5% of the variance in the GCE scale: organizational values, age-sensitive care, and resource availability (human-related and operational). CFA confirmed the model’s fit (CFI = 0.901, RMSEA = 0.049). Item analysis of GK and CGK revealed moderate difficulty (mean DIF I = 51.9 and 60.4, respectively), and reliability indices (KR-20 = 0.58 for GK and 0.52 for CGK) were moderate for pilot testing of the dichotomized type of knowledge tests.
conclusionsThe Geriatric Institutional Assessment Profile (GIAP) is valuable for the development and assessment of age-friendly hospitals. Examination of the modern GIAP’s factor structure and psychometric properties highlights its continuing adaptability and relevance. The current GIAP demonstrated robust construct validity and reliability for assessing geriatric-specific practices and knowledge among nursing staff, as well as reliability in a new language and cultural setting. This new examination of the GIAP’s psychometric properties and factor structure may help facilitate future research and more widespread practical use of the GIAP in additional populations and settings.
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.