CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Healthcare Education and Workforce IssuesNursing education and managementHealth Education and Validation

Understanding and measuring nurses’ professionalism: Development and validation of the Nurses’ Professionalism Inventory

Ichikawa, Naoko, Yamamoto‐Mitani, Noriko, Takai, Yukari, Tanaka, Makoto, Takemura, Yukie·2020·Journal of Nursing Management
DOI 10.1111/jonm.13116
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

AIMS: To develop a self-report assessment inventory to evaluate nurses' professionalism and test its validity and reliability. BACKGROUND: Professionalism is essential for nurses' development. To promote professionalism, evaluation indices must be developed. METHODS: The Nurses' Professionalism Inventory (NPI) was constructed through a literature review and interviews with expert nurses and other medical personnel. An anonymized cross-sectional survey that included this inventory was administered to 5,739 nurses in hospitals throughout Japan. RESULTS: A total of 4,183 (72.8%) questionnaires were returned, of which 3,655 (63.7%) with valid responses were used for further analyses. The Nurses' Professionalism Inventory consists of five subscales containing 28 items: (a) accountability, (b) self-improvement, (c) professional attitude, (d) advancement of the nursing profession and (e) professional membership. The internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) ranged from 0.84 to 0.90. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that this five-factor structure had good fit. The test-retest intraclass correlations were consistently greater than 0.6. CONCLUSIONS: The Nurses' Professionalism Inventory is valid and reliable. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The Nurses' Professionalism Inventory could be used to evaluate changes in nurses' professionalism and programmes designed to promote nurses' professionalism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jonm.13116

Cites

31 of 31 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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Six researchers repeatedly checked whether items represented e-professionalism, whether item content was suitable for judging attitude towards e-professionalism of dental and medical students, and whether the concept was covered in the entire scale.

    “Following the example of Ichikawa et al., six researchers repeatedly checked whether items represented e-professionalism, whether item content was suitable for judging attitude towards e-professionalism of dental and medical students, and whether concept of e-professionalism was covered in the entire scale [29].”

    From Development and validation of scale for measuring attitudes towards e-professionalism among medical and dental students: SMePROF-S scale (2021) · cites this paper as [29]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ichikawa, N., Yamamoto‐Mitani, N., Takai, Y., Tanaka, M., & Takemura, Y.
Affiliations
  • The University of Tokyo (JP)
  • Gunma Prefectural College of Health Sciences (JP)
  • Tokyo Medical and Dental University (JP)
Corresponding author
Ichikawa, Naoko
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Nursing Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-08-24
Volume
28
Issue
7
Pages
1607-1618
ISSN
  • 0966-0429 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2834
DOI
10.1111/jonm.13116
OpenAlex
W3047254845
Cited by
20
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3
FWCI
3.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Nursing Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Healthcare Education and Workforce Issues
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing education and management
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
instrument development, psychometric validation, reliability statistics, validity, accountability, professional attitudes, professional society membership, human development, nursing management
MeSH terms
Professionalism, Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Japan, Nurses, 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