Cited by 38Ethics in medical practicePalliative and Oncologic CareEthics and bioethics in healthcare

The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Ethical Issues Scale

Fry, Sara T., Duffy, Mary E.·2001·Journal of Nursing Scholarship

Abstract

Purpose To describe the Ethical Issues Scale (EIS), its conceptual development and psychometric evaluation, and its uses in determining how frequently nurses experience ethical issues in practice. Design The EIS was validated with a sample (N = 2,090) of New England registered nurses (RNs) currently in practice. The sample was randomly split into two approximately equal samples. The calibration sample was used to derive the underlying components; the validation sample was used to confirm the component structure. Methods Psychometric analysis of the 35-item EIS included: (a) item analysis, (b) confirmatory principal components analysis (PCA), and (c) internal consistency reliability using Cronbach's alpha. Results Three components (end-of-life-treatment issues, patient care issues, and human rights issues) were demonstrated, confirming the original conceptually-derived structure. The calibration sample accounted for 42.4% of initially extracted common variance; the validation sample accounted for 41.5% of initially extracted common variance. Conclusions The three EIS subscales had satisfactory internal consistency reliability and factorial validity for use as independent scales in future studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2001.00273.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fry, S. T., & Duffy, M. E.
Affiliations
Boston College (US)
Corresponding author
Fry, Sara T.
Venue
Journal of Nursing Scholarship
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-09
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
273-277
ISSN
  • 0363-2792 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-6546
  • 1547-5069
OpenAlex
W1986461495
Cited by
38
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
3.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Nursing Scholarship (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
nursing ethics, scale development, psychometric validation, human rights issues, registered nurses, factorial validity, internal consistency
MeSH terms
Ethics, Nursing, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Humans, New England, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review