MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024107860

[Cross-Cultural Adaptaton and Validation of the Attitudes Towards Men in Nursing Scale (ATMINS)].

2017· article· en· W3024107860 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMale Reproductive Health Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaVarimax rotationScale (ratio)Construct validityPsychologyFactorial analysisExploratory factor analysisInternal consistencyNursingSample (material)MedicineClinical psychologyPsychometricsStatisticsGeographyMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Aiming at detecting possible causes for the lack of male nursing professionals, Bartfay et al. developed a questionnaire named Attitudes Towards Men in Nursing Scale (ATMINS), which they tested a university in Ontario, Canada. Objective: Achieve a cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Attitudes Towards Men in Nursing Scale (ATMINS), in order to evaluate if results achieved using a Spanish sample are comparable with the Canadian study's results. Participantsm, Materials, and Method: Participants were recruited in universities of Alicante and Donostia (Basque Country). To assure voluntary participation in the study, all candidates were informed about the objective of the study and giving enough time to read the questionnaire. The questionnaire used was the Attitudes Toward Men in Nursing Scale (ATMINS), translated to Spanish. The Spanish version of the ARMINS scale was handed over to a total of 142 students from the Nursing Universities of Alicante and Donostia. Time needed to fill the questionnaires didn't exceed 5 minutes in any case, and no difficulty was observed during implementation. After testing the scale, an internal consistency analysis was performed using Cronbach's Alpha with correction by eliminating items. Validation of construct was done via Exploratory Factorial analysis with Varimax rotation. Results: The results show a reliability which does not reach a moderate degree. Eliminating item 6 in all subsamples, as well as the total sample suppressing any of the other 5 items, increases internal consistency. The exploratory factorial analysis supports a bi-factorial structure of the questionnaire with very high saturation on each factor and a negative charge inside factor 2 for item 6. The negative charge of item 6 keeps the saturation (0.717) after its inversion. By performing an internal consistency analysis taking only into account items of factor 1, the scale's consistency improves with results close to 0.70. Conclusion: The revised scale is a tool which enables easy and fast application. It is valid for the Spanish sample and provides an acceptable internal consistency. The results obtained in both universities in Spain and in Canada are comparable.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it