An integrative literature review of kidney transplantation knowledge tools
This study aimed to identify knowledge measurement tools for kidney transplantation (KT) and confirm their assessment methods, domains, and validity to provide useful information. An integrative review based on Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for System...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2023-01, Vol.18 (1), p.e0281073-e0281073 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e0281073 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | e0281073 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 18 |
| creator | Kang, Chan Mi Lee, Hyejin |
| description | This study aimed to identify knowledge measurement tools for kidney transplantation (KT) and confirm their assessment methods, domains, and validity to provide useful information.
An integrative review based on Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.
An integrative search was conducted using four English databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library) and the top three Korean databases (RISS, DBpia, and KISS). Search terms and strategies included ("kidney transplant*" OR "renal transplant*" OR "kidney replace*" OR "renal replace*" OR "kidney graft" OR "renal graft") & (knowledge OR awareness) & (scale OR tool OR instrument OR questionnaire OR inventory). The time limit was set to February 2022. The extracted data included the content of the tools, participants, and psychometrics. Quality of life was assessed using a psychometric grading framework.
A total of 15 studies and 13 tools were reviewed. Of these, seven studies (46.7%) targeted KT patients, five (33.3%) targeted KT candidates, and three (20.0%) included both groups. The number of items in the tools ranged from five to 33 items. Furthermore, seven tools comprised true-false questions and eight multiple-choice questions. The domains of the KT knowledge measurement tool used in each study differed across study participants. Both reliability and validity were confirmed in six tools, and only two showed a grade of "adequate" or higher.
A validated tool is required to measure KT knowledge. These tools can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions in promoting self-management after KT.
CRD42022334559. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0281073 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2771312689</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A735321624</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_df74e42b61f54ba1b5d136b8b9423983</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A735321624</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c641t-40f70602202764bea9b92f220ac12304c11f7963ab4d7048132727a73d82465e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl1v0zAUhiMEYqPwDxBEQkJw0eKv2skNUjUNKJo0ia9by0lOUneuXWynY_9-Ls2mBu2C-CK285z32G_eLHuJ0QxTgT-sXe-tMrOtszBDpMBI0EfZKS4pmXKC6OOj-Un2LIQ1QnNacP40O6Fc4LIo6Gn2dWFzbSN0XkW9g9zoCGnae8g97DRc567Nr3Rj4SaPXtmwNcrGxDqbX1l3baDpII_OmfA8e9IqE-DF8J5kPz-d_zj7Mr24_Lw8W1xMa85wnDLUCsQRIYgIzipQZVWSNi1VjQlFrMa4FSWnqmKNQKzAlAgilKBNQRifA51krw-6W-OCHGwIkgiBKSa8KBOxPBCNU2u59Xqj_I10Ssu_G853UvmoawOyaQUDRiqO2zmrFK7mDaa8KqqSEVoWNGl9HLr11QaaGmyywYxEx1-sXsnO7WTyt-AFSgLvBgHvfvcQotzoUINJPoLrh3OnJ_WbZG_-QR--3UB1Kl1A29alvvVeVC4EnVOCOWGJmj1ApdHARtcpM61O-6OC96OCxET4EzvVhyCX37_9P3v5a8y-PWJXoExcBWf6fYTCGGQHsPYuBA_tvckYyX3k79yQ-8jLIfKp7NXxD7ovuss4vQVSsfnr</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2771312689</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>An integrative literature review of kidney transplantation knowledge tools</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Kang, Chan Mi ; Lee, Hyejin</creator><contributor>Gołębiewska, Justyna</contributor><creatorcontrib>Kang, Chan Mi ; Lee, Hyejin ; Gołębiewska, Justyna</creatorcontrib><description>This study aimed to identify knowledge measurement tools for kidney transplantation (KT) and confirm their assessment methods, domains, and validity to provide useful information.
An integrative review based on Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.
An integrative search was conducted using four English databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library) and the top three Korean databases (RISS, DBpia, and KISS). Search terms and strategies included ("kidney transplant*" OR "renal transplant*" OR "kidney replace*" OR "renal replace*" OR "kidney graft" OR "renal graft") & (knowledge OR awareness) & (scale OR tool OR instrument OR questionnaire OR inventory). The time limit was set to February 2022. The extracted data included the content of the tools, participants, and psychometrics. Quality of life was assessed using a psychometric grading framework.
A total of 15 studies and 13 tools were reviewed. Of these, seven studies (46.7%) targeted KT patients, five (33.3%) targeted KT candidates, and three (20.0%) included both groups. The number of items in the tools ranged from five to 33 items. Furthermore, seven tools comprised true-false questions and eight multiple-choice questions. The domains of the KT knowledge measurement tool used in each study differed across study participants. Both reliability and validity were confirmed in six tools, and only two showed a grade of "adequate" or higher.
A validated tool is required to measure KT knowledge. These tools can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions in promoting self-management after KT.
CRD42022334559.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281073</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36719883</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Biology and Life Sciences ; Citation management software ; Domains ; Engineering and Technology ; Evaluation ; Humans ; Immunosuppressive agents ; Keywords ; Kidney diseases ; Kidney Transplantation ; Kidney transplants ; Kidneys ; Knowledge ; Literature reviews ; Medical research ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Medicine, Experimental ; Meta-analysis ; Multiple choice ; Psychometrics ; Quality assessment ; Quality of Life ; Quantitative psychology ; Questions ; Reproducibility of Results ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Review boards ; Social Sciences ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Transplantation ; Validity</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2023-01, Vol.18 (1), p.e0281073-e0281073</ispartof><rights>Copyright: © 2023 Kang, Lee. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2023 Kang, Lee. 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>2023 Kang, Lee 2023 Kang, Lee</rights><rights>2023 Kang, Lee. 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><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c641t-40f70602202764bea9b92f220ac12304c11f7963ab4d7048132727a73d82465e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5158-7556 ; 0000-0001-5485-355X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9888680/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9888680/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27924,27925,53791,53793,79600,79601</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36719883$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Gołębiewska, Justyna</contributor><creatorcontrib>Kang, Chan Mi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Hyejin</creatorcontrib><title>An integrative literature review of kidney transplantation knowledge tools</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>This study aimed to identify knowledge measurement tools for kidney transplantation (KT) and confirm their assessment methods, domains, and validity to provide useful information.
An integrative review based on Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.
An integrative search was conducted using four English databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library) and the top three Korean databases (RISS, DBpia, and KISS). Search terms and strategies included ("kidney transplant*" OR "renal transplant*" OR "kidney replace*" OR "renal replace*" OR "kidney graft" OR "renal graft") & (knowledge OR awareness) & (scale OR tool OR instrument OR questionnaire OR inventory). The time limit was set to February 2022. The extracted data included the content of the tools, participants, and psychometrics. Quality of life was assessed using a psychometric grading framework.
A total of 15 studies and 13 tools were reviewed. Of these, seven studies (46.7%) targeted KT patients, five (33.3%) targeted KT candidates, and three (20.0%) included both groups. The number of items in the tools ranged from five to 33 items. Furthermore, seven tools comprised true-false questions and eight multiple-choice questions. The domains of the KT knowledge measurement tool used in each study differed across study participants. Both reliability and validity were confirmed in six tools, and only two showed a grade of "adequate" or higher.
A validated tool is required to measure KT knowledge. These tools can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions in promoting self-management after KT.
CRD42022334559.</description><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Citation management software</subject><subject>Domains</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunosuppressive agents</subject><subject>Keywords</subject><subject>Kidney diseases</subject><subject>Kidney Transplantation</subject><subject>Kidney transplants</subject><subject>Kidneys</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Medicine, Experimental</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Multiple choice</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Quantitative psychology</subject><subject>Questions</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Review boards</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Transplantation</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl1v0zAUhiMEYqPwDxBEQkJw0eKv2skNUjUNKJo0ia9by0lOUneuXWynY_9-Ls2mBu2C-CK285z32G_eLHuJ0QxTgT-sXe-tMrOtszBDpMBI0EfZKS4pmXKC6OOj-Un2LIQ1QnNacP40O6Fc4LIo6Gn2dWFzbSN0XkW9g9zoCGnae8g97DRc567Nr3Rj4SaPXtmwNcrGxDqbX1l3baDpII_OmfA8e9IqE-DF8J5kPz-d_zj7Mr24_Lw8W1xMa85wnDLUCsQRIYgIzipQZVWSNi1VjQlFrMa4FSWnqmKNQKzAlAgilKBNQRifA51krw-6W-OCHGwIkgiBKSa8KBOxPBCNU2u59Xqj_I10Ssu_G853UvmoawOyaQUDRiqO2zmrFK7mDaa8KqqSEVoWNGl9HLr11QaaGmyywYxEx1-sXsnO7WTyt-AFSgLvBgHvfvcQotzoUINJPoLrh3OnJ_WbZG_-QR--3UB1Kl1A29alvvVeVC4EnVOCOWGJmj1ApdHARtcpM61O-6OC96OCxET4EzvVhyCX37_9P3v5a8y-PWJXoExcBWf6fYTCGGQHsPYuBA_tvckYyX3k79yQ-8jLIfKp7NXxD7ovuss4vQVSsfnr</recordid><startdate>20230131</startdate><enddate>20230131</enddate><creator>Kang, Chan Mi</creator><creator>Lee, Hyejin</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>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</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><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5158-7556</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5485-355X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230131</creationdate><title>An integrative literature review of kidney transplantation knowledge tools</title><author>Kang, Chan Mi ; Lee, Hyejin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c641t-40f70602202764bea9b92f220ac12304c11f7963ab4d7048132727a73d82465e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Citation management software</topic><topic>Domains</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunosuppressive agents</topic><topic>Keywords</topic><topic>Kidney diseases</topic><topic>Kidney Transplantation</topic><topic>Kidney transplants</topic><topic>Kidneys</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Medicine, Experimental</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Multiple choice</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Quantitative psychology</topic><topic>Questions</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Review boards</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Transplantation</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kang, Chan Mi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Hyejin</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & 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 & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>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 Korea</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 & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</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>Kang, Chan Mi</au><au>Lee, Hyejin</au><au>Gołębiewska, Justyna</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>An integrative literature review of kidney transplantation knowledge tools</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2023-01-31</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>e0281073</spage><epage>e0281073</epage><pages>e0281073-e0281073</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>This study aimed to identify knowledge measurement tools for kidney transplantation (KT) and confirm their assessment methods, domains, and validity to provide useful information.
An integrative review based on Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.
An integrative search was conducted using four English databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library) and the top three Korean databases (RISS, DBpia, and KISS). Search terms and strategies included ("kidney transplant*" OR "renal transplant*" OR "kidney replace*" OR "renal replace*" OR "kidney graft" OR "renal graft") & (knowledge OR awareness) & (scale OR tool OR instrument OR questionnaire OR inventory). The time limit was set to February 2022. The extracted data included the content of the tools, participants, and psychometrics. Quality of life was assessed using a psychometric grading framework.
A total of 15 studies and 13 tools were reviewed. Of these, seven studies (46.7%) targeted KT patients, five (33.3%) targeted KT candidates, and three (20.0%) included both groups. The number of items in the tools ranged from five to 33 items. Furthermore, seven tools comprised true-false questions and eight multiple-choice questions. The domains of the KT knowledge measurement tool used in each study differed across study participants. Both reliability and validity were confirmed in six tools, and only two showed a grade of "adequate" or higher.
A validated tool is required to measure KT knowledge. These tools can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions in promoting self-management after KT.
CRD42022334559.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>36719883</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0281073</doi><tpages>e0281073</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5158-7556</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5485-355X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2023-01, Vol.18 (1), p.e0281073-e0281073 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2771312689 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Biology and Life Sciences Citation management software Domains Engineering and Technology Evaluation Humans Immunosuppressive agents Keywords Kidney diseases Kidney Transplantation Kidney transplants Kidneys Knowledge Literature reviews Medical research Medicine and Health Sciences Medicine, Experimental Meta-analysis Multiple choice Psychometrics Quality assessment Quality of Life Quantitative psychology Questions Reproducibility of Results Research and Analysis Methods Review boards Social Sciences Surveys and Questionnaires Transplantation Validity |
| title | An integrative literature review of kidney transplantation knowledge tools |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T18%3A28%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=An%20integrative%20literature%20review%20of%20kidney%20transplantation%20knowledge%20tools&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Kang,%20Chan%20Mi&rft.date=2023-01-31&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=e0281073&rft.epage=e0281073&rft.pages=e0281073-e0281073&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0281073&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA735321624%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2771312689&rft_id=info:pmid/36719883&rft_galeid=A735321624&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_df74e42b61f54ba1b5d136b8b9423983&rfr_iscdi=true |