Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2026
Construction and content validation of a checklist for effective communication of nursing care to newborns.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Brito Mychelangela de Assis, Carneiro Cristianne Teixeira, Rocha Ruth Cardoso, Borges José Wicto Pereira, Bezerra Maria Augusta Rocha, Rocha Silvana Santiago da
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: to construct and validate the content of a checklist to support communication of nursing care for newborns admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit.
METHODS: a methodological study conducted in two stages. The first involved three dimensions: theoretical, grounded in an integrative literature review; operational, with the development of the initial version of the checklist; and empirical, carried out through the "Plan, Do, Check, Act" cycle with the participation of 15 nurses from a neonatal intensive care unit. The second stage consisted of content validation by 19 experts, using the Content Validity Ratio.
RESULTS: the final checklist consisted of 84 items, distributed as follows: 31 items in the Procedures category, 23 in Checking, and 30 in Documentation. The overall Content Validity Ratio reached an average of 0.948.
CONCLUSIONS: the checklist was validated in terms of content by consensus of the expert committee and can be used in clinical practice.
METHODS: a methodological study conducted in two stages. The first involved three dimensions: theoretical, grounded in an integrative literature review; operational, with the development of the initial version of the checklist; and empirical, carried out through the "Plan, Do, Check, Act" cycle with the participation of 15 nurses from a neonatal intensive care unit. The second stage consisted of content validation by 19 experts, using the Content Validity Ratio.
RESULTS: the final checklist consisted of 84 items, distributed as follows: 31 items in the Procedures category, 23 in Checking, and 30 in Documentation. The overall Content Validity Ratio reached an average of 0.948.
CONCLUSIONS: the checklist was validated in terms of content by consensus of the expert committee and can be used in clinical practice.