Translation, adaptation, and psychometric assessment of the Alberta Context Tool for use with nurses in adult acute care in Japan
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Currently, there is no Japanese tool to measure organizational context factors that influence nurses' implementation of evidence-based practices. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and psychometrically evaluate the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) for nurses in Japan. METHODS: We completed forward translations with reconciliation, expert discussions, back translations with reconciliation, back translation review by tool developers, and semi-structured cognitive interviews with verbal probing. A convenience sample of nurses from five hospitals completed the translated tool. Item descriptives (including missing data), internal structure (confirmatory factor analyses [CFA]), criterion validity (correlations with Team Climate Inventory [TCI] items "support for innovative ideas"), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha, item-concept correlations), and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation) were examined. RESULTS: = 1037.28, root mean square error of approximation = 0.054, Comparative Fit Index = 0.913, Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.902, standardized root mean square residual = 0.053). Correlations between the 10 ACT concepts and TCI ranged from .08 to .43, with nine statistically significant (p < .05). Cronbach's alpha ranged from .22 to .91 (exceeding 0.70 for 8/10 concepts), and item-concept correlations ranged from .15 to .96 (exceeding 0.70 for 26/56 items). Retest reliability (N = 65) ranged from 0.45 to 0.81. CONCLUSIONS: The ACT Japanese version demonstrated initial evidence of acceptable validity and reliability for most concepts and items, supporting its use in assessing organizational context.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it