Validation of the verbal and social interaction questionnaire for nursing students–The focus of nursing students in their relationship with patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Verbal and Social Interaction Nursing Students questionnaire (VSI-NS) has been created to measure the development of verbal, social and interactional skills of nursing students with patients, from their perspective in nursing care. The aim of the present study was to determine the construct validity and internal consistency reliability of the questionnaire. The study had a methodological and developmental design and was carried out in four steps: adjustment of the items, face validity, data collection and data analysis. The number of items was reduced from 48 to 31. The factor analysis of the final 31 items resulted in four quite distinct factors: “Inviting to talk about feelings and thoughts”, “Building a caring relationship”, “Encouraging social and practical aspects in daily life” and “Caring towards health and wellbeing”. The results showed satisfactory psychometric properties in terms of content validity, construct validity and the internal consistency reliability of the questionnaire. It could be concluded that the original conceptual model could serve as a theoretical foundation to explain and understand nurses’ caring interactions with their patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".