Profese online 2012, 5(2):11-15 | DOI: 10.5507/pol.2012.011

TYPES OF VALIDITY IN NANDA INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH

Lenka Mazalová, Jana Marečková
Department of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic

The article aims to give information about types of validity and validation studies of diagnostic NANDA International, emphasize their importance for the development of nursing science and point out the researchers who deal with this issue. The authors suppose that validity is an essential component of research and has a significant impact on the credibility of the research diagnostic concepts of NANDA International. Authors claim that in order to strengthen the scientific validation of NANDA International diagnostics, the priority will be to implement studies using the construct validity.

Keywords: validity, validation, nursing diagnosis, NANDA International

Published: October 2012  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Mazalová, L., & Marečková, J. (2012). TYPES OF VALIDITY IN NANDA INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH. Profese Online, 5(2), 11-15. doi: 10.5507/pol.2012.011
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article
    Czech version

    References

    1. CREASON, S. N. 2004. Clinical Validation of Nursing Diagnoses. International Journal of Nursing Terminologies and Classification [online]. 2004, vol. 15, p. 123-132. ISSN 1541-5147. [cit. 2011-01-08]. Dostupný z www: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=15620022&site=e. ISSN 1744-618X.
    2. FEHRING, J. R. 1987. Methods to validate nursing diagnoses. Nursing Faculty Research and Publications [online]. 1987, p. 1-9. [cit. 2010-04-08]. Dostupný z www: http://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1058&context=nursing_fac
    3. FEHRING, J. R. 1994. The Fehring Model. In CARROL-JOHNSON et al. (eds.) Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceeding of the tenth conference. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Lipincot, 1994. p. 55-62. ISBN 0-397-55011-1.
    4. GORDON, M. 1994. Nursing Diagnosis. Process and Application. 3rd Edition. New York: Mosby-Year Book Inc., 1994. 421 p. ISBN 0-8016-6053-X.
    5. HOLMANOVÁ, E., ŽIAKOVÁ, K., ČÁP, J. 2006. Metodologické poznámky k problematike validizácie ošetrovatelských diagnóz. Kontakt. 2006, roč. 8, č. 1, s. 25-30. ISSN 1212-4117. Go to original source...
    6. CHRÁSKA, M. 2007. Metody pedagogického výzkumu: základy kvantitativního výzkumu. 1. vyd. Praha: Grada, 2007. 265 s. ISBN 978-80-247-1369-4.
    7. KERLINGER, F. N. 1972. Základy výzkumu chování: pedagogický a psychologický výzkum. 1. vyd. Praha: Academia, 1972. 708 s.
    8. LEVIN, R. 2001. Who are the Experts? A Commentary on Nursing Diagnosis Validation Studies. Nursing Diagnosis. 2001, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 29-32. ISSN 1046-7459. Go to original source...
    9. LUNNEY, M. 2008. Perspective. The Need for International Nursing Diagnosis Research and Theoretical Framework. International Journal of Nursing Terminologies and Classification. 2008, vol. 19, no. 1, p. 28-34. ISSN 1541-5147. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    10. LUNNEY, M. 2003. Critical Thinking and Accuracy of Nursing Diagnoses. International Journal of Nursing Terminologies and Classification. 2003, vol. 14, no. 3, p. 96-107. ISSN 1541-5147. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. PARKER, L., LUNNEY, M. 1998. Moving Beyond Content Validation of Nursing Diagnoses. Nursing Diagnosis. 1998, vol. 9, no. 4, p. 144-150. ISSN 1046-7459. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. PELIKÁN, J. 2011. Základy empirického výzkumu pedagogických jevů. 2. vyd. Praha: Karolinum, 2011. 270 s. ISBN 978-80-246-1916-3.
    13. PETRUSEK, M., LINHART, J. et al. 1996. Velký sociologický slovník II, P-Ž. 1. vyd. Praha: Karolinum, 1996. 1627 s. ISBN 80-7184-310-5.
    14. POLIT, D., F., BECK, T., CH. Nursing Research. 8th Ed. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 2008. 796 p. ISBN 978-0-7817-9468-8
    15. SCROGGINS, L., HARRIS, M. 2003. Evaluating Nursing Diagnoses. International Journal of Nursing Terminologies and Classification. 2003, vol. 14, no. 4, p. 8. ISSN 1541-5147. Go to original source...
    16. WHITLEY, G. G. 1999a. A Critical Time for Nursing Diagnosis Research. Nursing Diagnosis. 1999, vol. 4, no. 10, p. 173-174. ISSN 1046-7459. Go to original source...
    17. WHITLEY, G. G. 1999b. Processes and Methodologies for Research Validation of Nursing Diagnoses. Nursing Diagnosis. 1999, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 5-14. ISSN 1046-7459. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    18. WHITLEY, G. G. 1995. Concept Analysis as Foundational to Nursing Diagnosis Research. Nursing Diagnosis. 1995, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 91-92. ISSN 1046-7459. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    19. WHITLEY, G. G. 1992. Concept Analysis of Fear. Nursing Diagnosis. 1992, vol. 3, no. 4, p. 155-161. ISSN 1046-7459. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    20. ZELENÍKOVÁ, R., ŽIAKOVÁ, K., JAROŠOVÁ, D., VRUBLOVÁ, I. 2010. Návrh kritérií pre výber expertov pre validizáciu ošetrovateľských diagnóz v ČR a SR.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content