Nurses' self-efficacy and outcome expectancy in evidence-based practice: Translation, construct validity and internal consistency of the Dutch scales
Background: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is crucial for appropriate, effective, and affordable care. Despite EBP education, barriers like low self-efficacy and outcome expectancy limit nurses’ engagement in EBP. Reliable scales are essential to evaluate interventions aimed at improving self-efficac...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666142X24001139 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is crucial for appropriate, effective, and affordable care. Despite EBP education, barriers like low self-efficacy and outcome expectancy limit nurses’ engagement in EBP. Reliable scales are essential to evaluate interventions aimed at improving self-efficacy and outcome expectancy in EBP. The English Self-efficacy and Outcome Expectancy in EBP scales are psychometrically sound. Objectives: To describe the translation, construct validity and internal consistency of the Dutch Self-efficacy and Outcome Expectancy in EBP Scales. Method: The scales were translated forward and backward, piloted for comprehensibility and completeness and then administered among Dutch nurses and nursing students. Results: Pilot testing confirmed comprehensibility, completeness, and relevance of the items. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (n = 769) tested a second-order model for the Self-efficacy scale (Comparative Fit Index (CFI)=0.96, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)=0.95, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA)=0.06, Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR)=0.04) and a single-factor model for the Outcome Expectancy Scale (CFI=0.99, TLI=0.99, RMSEA=0.06, SRMR=0.01). Chi-squared tests remained significant. Hypothesis testing confirmed construct validity of the Self-efficacy (r = 0.77) and Outcome Expectancy Scale (r = 0.74). Both scales exhibited high internal consistency with McDonald's Omega and Cronbach's Alpha values above 0.95. Discussion: Both scales exhibit theoretical soundness and positive fit indices. Significant chi-square tests and high correlations between weighted and unweighted scores support using unweighted scores over utilizing the estimated model to calculate weighted scores. Conclusions: Construct validity and internal consistency of the Dutch Self-efficacy and Outcome Expectancy in EBP Scales are good. Future research should prioritize responsiveness and test-retest reliability. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2666-142X |