Skip to main content

Table 5 Psychometric properties of tested scales

From: Validation of Finnish Neecham Confusion Scale and Nursing Delirium Screening Scale using Confusion Assessment Method algorithm as a comparison scale

 

Internal consistency1

Inter-rater reliability2

Concurrent validity3

CAM

PI (n = 191)

0.83 (0.792, 0.867)

PI vs. RNs (n = 117)

0.60 (0.374, 0.820)

(p = 0.000)

 

RNs (n = 111)

0.86 (0.818, 0.899)

NEECHAM

PI (n = 75)

0.80 (0.725, 0.862)

PI vs. RNs (n = 19)

0.87 (0.631, 1.113)

(p = 0.001)

 

RNs (n = 42)

0.80 (0.697, 0.880)

Nu-DESC

PI (n = 111)

0.76 (0.680, 0.823)

PI vs. RNs (n = 37)

0.47 (0.071, 0.863)

(p = 0.022)

 

RNs (n = 69)

0.78 (0.688, 0.853)

NEECHAM (PI) vs. Nu-DESC (RNs)

  

PI vs. RNs (n = 28)

0.68 (p < 0.01)

Nu-DESC (PI) vs. NEECHAM (RNs)

PI vs. RNs (n = 25)

0.72 (p < 0.01)

CAM vs. NEECHAM

  

PI (n = 80)

0.56 (p < 0.01)

RNs (n = 44)

0.59 (p < 0.01)

CAM vs.Nu-DESC

  

PI (n = 112)

0.91 (p < 0.01)

RNs (n = 66)

0.42 (p = 0.01)

  1. 1Cronbach’s α, (95% CI)
  2. 2Cohen’s κ, (95% CI, p-values)
  3. 3Spearman’s Rank Correlation Coefficient rs (p-values)
Back to article page

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

Contact us