Reliability and Validity of the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) with Professional Nurses: Findings from a Multi-Study Analysis

Although organizational context is central to evidence-based practice, underdeveloped measurement hinders its assessment. The Alberta Context Tool, comprised of 59 items that tap 10 modifiable contextual concepts, was developed to address this gap. The purpose of this study to examine the reliabilit...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2015-06, Vol.10 (6), p.e0127405-e0127405
Main Authors: Squires, Janet E, Hayduk, Leslie, Hutchinson, Alison M, Mallick, Ranjeeta, Norton, Peter G, Cummings, Greta G, Estabrooks, Carole A
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Corporate culture
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Evidence-based nursing
Evidence-Based Practice - methods
Female
Health care
Health services
Humans
Long term health care
Male
Managers
Medical personnel
Medical research
Middle Aged
Nurses
Nursing schools
Organizational aspects
Pediatrics
Principal components analysis
Professionals
Psychometrics - methods
Quantitative psychology
Reliability analysis
Studies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Validity
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-61efa8d8084bfb4d58e05fb82f9aaaf1bc1b2ba0f5fa560f8ff087e8374c4ed93
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-61efa8d8084bfb4d58e05fb82f9aaaf1bc1b2ba0f5fa560f8ff087e8374c4ed93
container_end_page e0127405
container_issue 6
container_start_page e0127405
container_title PloS one
container_volume 10
creator Squires, Janet E
Hayduk, Leslie
Hutchinson, Alison M
Mallick, Ranjeeta
Norton, Peter G
Cummings, Greta G
Estabrooks, Carole A
description Although organizational context is central to evidence-based practice, underdeveloped measurement hinders its assessment. The Alberta Context Tool, comprised of 59 items that tap 10 modifiable contextual concepts, was developed to address this gap. The purpose of this study to examine the reliability and validity of scores obtained when the Alberta Context Tool is completed by professional nurses across different healthcare settings. Five separate studies (N = 2361 nurses across different care settings) comprised the study sample. Reliability and validity were assessed. Cronbach's alpha exceeded 0.70 for 9/10 Alberta Context Tool concepts. Item-total correlations exceeded acceptable standards for 56/59 items. Confirmatory Factor Analyses coordinated acceptably with the Alberta Context Tool's proposed latent structure. The mean values for each Alberta Context Tool concept increased from low to high levels of research utilization(as hypothesized) further supporting its validity. This study provides robust evidence for reliability and validity of scores obtained with the Alberta Context Tool when administered to professional nurses.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0127405
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1690401767</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_91ffe8127d2146daa4a04eb668d8a426</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>3723026951</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-61efa8d8084bfb4d58e05fb82f9aaaf1bc1b2ba0f5fa560f8ff087e8374c4ed93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkl1v0zAUhiMEYmPwDxBY4mZctNiJ4zi7QKoqBpPGh6Bwa53Ex60rNy62s5F_T7p204a48tdzXr_n6M2yl4xOWVGxd2vfhw7cdOs7nFKWV5yWj7JjVhf5ROS0eHxvf5Q9i3FNaVlIIZ5mR7mgtZRldZwN39FZaKyzaSDQafILnNW7gzckrZDMXIMhAZn7LuGfRBbeO3I6my_ekmubVuRb8AZjtH70Qr70IWI8I-e207ZbRmKC3xAgn3uX7ORH6vVAZiM4RBufZ08MuIgvDutJ9vP8w2L-aXL59ePFfHY5actcpIlgaEBqSSVvTMN1KZGWppG5qQHAsKZlTd4ANaWBUlAjjaGyQllUvOWo6-Ike73X3Tof1WFqUTFRU05ZJaqRuNgT2sNabYPdQBiUB6tuLnxYKgjJtg5VzYxBOQ5b54wLDcCBcmyEGB0Cz8Wo9f7wW99sULfYpQDugejDl86u1NJfKc4rUUo-CpweBIL_3WNMamNji85Bh76_8c0oE0UpR_TNP-j_u-N7qg0-xoDmzgyjapek2yq1S5I6JGkse3W_kbui2-gUfwE9Yci2</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1690401767</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reliability and Validity of the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) with Professional Nurses: Findings from a Multi-Study Analysis</title><source>PubMed Central Free</source><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Squires, Janet E ; Hayduk, Leslie ; Hutchinson, Alison M ; Mallick, Ranjeeta ; Norton, Peter G ; Cummings, Greta G ; Estabrooks, Carole A</creator><contributor>Bond, Kenneth</contributor><creatorcontrib>Squires, Janet E ; Hayduk, Leslie ; Hutchinson, Alison M ; Mallick, Ranjeeta ; Norton, Peter G ; Cummings, Greta G ; Estabrooks, Carole A ; Bond, Kenneth</creatorcontrib><description>Although organizational context is central to evidence-based practice, underdeveloped measurement hinders its assessment. The Alberta Context Tool, comprised of 59 items that tap 10 modifiable contextual concepts, was developed to address this gap. The purpose of this study to examine the reliability and validity of scores obtained when the Alberta Context Tool is completed by professional nurses across different healthcare settings. Five separate studies (N = 2361 nurses across different care settings) comprised the study sample. Reliability and validity were assessed. Cronbach's alpha exceeded 0.70 for 9/10 Alberta Context Tool concepts. Item-total correlations exceeded acceptable standards for 56/59 items. Confirmatory Factor Analyses coordinated acceptably with the Alberta Context Tool's proposed latent structure. The mean values for each Alberta Context Tool concept increased from low to high levels of research utilization(as hypothesized) further supporting its validity. This study provides robust evidence for reliability and validity of scores obtained with the Alberta Context Tool when administered to professional nurses.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127405</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26098857</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Corporate culture ; Data Interpretation, Statistical ; Evidence-based nursing ; Evidence-Based Practice - methods ; Female ; Health care ; Health services ; Humans ; Long term health care ; Male ; Managers ; Medical personnel ; Medical research ; Middle Aged ; Nurses ; Nursing schools ; Organizational aspects ; Pediatrics ; Principal components analysis ; Professionals ; Psychometrics - methods ; Quantitative psychology ; Reliability analysis ; Studies ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Validity ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2015-06, Vol.10 (6), p.e0127405-e0127405</ispartof><rights>2015 Squires et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2015 Squires et al 2015 Squires et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-61efa8d8084bfb4d58e05fb82f9aaaf1bc1b2ba0f5fa560f8ff087e8374c4ed93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-61efa8d8084bfb4d58e05fb82f9aaaf1bc1b2ba0f5fa560f8ff087e8374c4ed93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1690401767/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1690401767?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,75126</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26098857$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Bond, Kenneth</contributor><creatorcontrib>Squires, Janet E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayduk, Leslie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hutchinson, Alison M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mallick, Ranjeeta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Norton, Peter G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cummings, Greta G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Estabrooks, Carole A</creatorcontrib><title>Reliability and Validity of the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) with Professional Nurses: Findings from a Multi-Study Analysis</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Although organizational context is central to evidence-based practice, underdeveloped measurement hinders its assessment. The Alberta Context Tool, comprised of 59 items that tap 10 modifiable contextual concepts, was developed to address this gap. The purpose of this study to examine the reliability and validity of scores obtained when the Alberta Context Tool is completed by professional nurses across different healthcare settings. Five separate studies (N = 2361 nurses across different care settings) comprised the study sample. Reliability and validity were assessed. Cronbach's alpha exceeded 0.70 for 9/10 Alberta Context Tool concepts. Item-total correlations exceeded acceptable standards for 56/59 items. Confirmatory Factor Analyses coordinated acceptably with the Alberta Context Tool's proposed latent structure. The mean values for each Alberta Context Tool concept increased from low to high levels of research utilization(as hypothesized) further supporting its validity. This study provides robust evidence for reliability and validity of scores obtained with the Alberta Context Tool when administered to professional nurses.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Corporate culture</subject><subject>Data Interpretation, Statistical</subject><subject>Evidence-based nursing</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Practice - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Long term health care</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Managers</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Nursing schools</subject><subject>Organizational aspects</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Principal components analysis</subject><subject>Professionals</subject><subject>Psychometrics - methods</subject><subject>Quantitative psychology</subject><subject>Reliability analysis</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Validity</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptkl1v0zAUhiMEYmPwDxBY4mZctNiJ4zi7QKoqBpPGh6Bwa53Ex60rNy62s5F_T7p204a48tdzXr_n6M2yl4xOWVGxd2vfhw7cdOs7nFKWV5yWj7JjVhf5ROS0eHxvf5Q9i3FNaVlIIZ5mR7mgtZRldZwN39FZaKyzaSDQafILnNW7gzckrZDMXIMhAZn7LuGfRBbeO3I6my_ekmubVuRb8AZjtH70Qr70IWI8I-e207ZbRmKC3xAgn3uX7ORH6vVAZiM4RBufZ08MuIgvDutJ9vP8w2L-aXL59ePFfHY5actcpIlgaEBqSSVvTMN1KZGWppG5qQHAsKZlTd4ANaWBUlAjjaGyQllUvOWo6-Ike73X3Tof1WFqUTFRU05ZJaqRuNgT2sNabYPdQBiUB6tuLnxYKgjJtg5VzYxBOQ5b54wLDcCBcmyEGB0Cz8Wo9f7wW99sULfYpQDugejDl86u1NJfKc4rUUo-CpweBIL_3WNMamNji85Bh76_8c0oE0UpR_TNP-j_u-N7qg0-xoDmzgyjapek2yq1S5I6JGkse3W_kbui2-gUfwE9Yci2</recordid><startdate>20150622</startdate><enddate>20150622</enddate><creator>Squires, Janet E</creator><creator>Hayduk, Leslie</creator><creator>Hutchinson, Alison M</creator><creator>Mallick, Ranjeeta</creator><creator>Norton, Peter G</creator><creator>Cummings, Greta G</creator><creator>Estabrooks, Carole A</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150622</creationdate><title>Reliability and Validity of the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) with Professional Nurses: Findings from a Multi-Study Analysis</title><author>Squires, Janet E ; Hayduk, Leslie ; Hutchinson, Alison M ; Mallick, Ranjeeta ; Norton, Peter G ; Cummings, Greta G ; Estabrooks, Carole A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-61efa8d8084bfb4d58e05fb82f9aaaf1bc1b2ba0f5fa560f8ff087e8374c4ed93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Corporate culture</topic><topic>Data Interpretation, Statistical</topic><topic>Evidence-based nursing</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Practice - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Long term health care</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Managers</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Nursing schools</topic><topic>Organizational aspects</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Principal components analysis</topic><topic>Professionals</topic><topic>Psychometrics - methods</topic><topic>Quantitative psychology</topic><topic>Reliability analysis</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Validity</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Squires, Janet E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayduk, Leslie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hutchinson, Alison M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mallick, Ranjeeta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Norton, Peter G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cummings, Greta G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Estabrooks, Carole A</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest_Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database‎ (1962 - current)</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies &amp; aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials science collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Squires, Janet E</au><au>Hayduk, Leslie</au><au>Hutchinson, Alison M</au><au>Mallick, Ranjeeta</au><au>Norton, Peter G</au><au>Cummings, Greta G</au><au>Estabrooks, Carole A</au><au>Bond, Kenneth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reliability and Validity of the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) with Professional Nurses: Findings from a Multi-Study Analysis</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2015-06-22</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>e0127405</spage><epage>e0127405</epage><pages>e0127405-e0127405</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Although organizational context is central to evidence-based practice, underdeveloped measurement hinders its assessment. The Alberta Context Tool, comprised of 59 items that tap 10 modifiable contextual concepts, was developed to address this gap. The purpose of this study to examine the reliability and validity of scores obtained when the Alberta Context Tool is completed by professional nurses across different healthcare settings. Five separate studies (N = 2361 nurses across different care settings) comprised the study sample. Reliability and validity were assessed. Cronbach's alpha exceeded 0.70 for 9/10 Alberta Context Tool concepts. Item-total correlations exceeded acceptable standards for 56/59 items. Confirmatory Factor Analyses coordinated acceptably with the Alberta Context Tool's proposed latent structure. The mean values for each Alberta Context Tool concept increased from low to high levels of research utilization(as hypothesized) further supporting its validity. This study provides robust evidence for reliability and validity of scores obtained with the Alberta Context Tool when administered to professional nurses.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>26098857</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0127405</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2015-06, Vol.10 (6), p.e0127405-e0127405
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_1690401767
source PubMed Central Free; Publicly Available Content Database
subjects Adult
Aged
Corporate culture
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Evidence-based nursing
Evidence-Based Practice - methods
Female
Health care
Health services
Humans
Long term health care
Male
Managers
Medical personnel
Medical research
Middle Aged
Nurses
Nursing schools
Organizational aspects
Pediatrics
Principal components analysis
Professionals
Psychometrics - methods
Quantitative psychology
Reliability analysis
Studies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Validity
Young Adult
title Reliability and Validity of the Alberta Context Tool (ACT) with Professional Nurses: Findings from a Multi-Study Analysis
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T08%3A53%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reliability%20and%20Validity%20of%20the%20Alberta%20Context%20Tool%20(ACT)%20with%20Professional%20Nurses:%20Findings%20from%20a%20Multi-Study%20Analysis&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Squires,%20Janet%20E&rft.date=2015-06-22&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=e0127405&rft.epage=e0127405&rft.pages=e0127405-e0127405&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0127405&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_plos_%3E3723026951%3C/proquest_plos_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-61efa8d8084bfb4d58e05fb82f9aaaf1bc1b2ba0f5fa560f8ff087e8374c4ed93%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1690401767&rft_id=info:pmid/26098857&rfr_iscdi=true