Nursing process performance measurement tool based on bloom’s revised taxonomy: A validity and reliability analysis

This study aimed to develop a measurement tool that could evaluate educational approaches by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process and strengthening the connection between education and clinical practice. The nursing process is a core component of nursing...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Nurse education in practice 2024-11, Vol.81, p.104165, Article 104165
1. Verfasser: Lee, Ji Sun
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 104165
container_title Nurse education in practice
container_volume 81
creator Lee, Ji Sun
description This study aimed to develop a measurement tool that could evaluate educational approaches by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process and strengthening the connection between education and clinical practice. The nursing process is a core component of nursing practice and supports nurses and nursing students in systematically performing the problem-solving process necessary for patient health management. Cross-sectional, methodological study. A nursing process performance measurement tool that could measure the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process was developed based on Anderson’s and Bloom’s revised taxonomy. The data for this study were collected from July to August 2023 at four universities in South Korea. The reliability and validity of the measurement tool were evaluated through a survey conducted on 406 nursing students. Participants were third- and fourth-year nursing students with clinical practice experience, recruited through purposive sampling. The developed tool was designed to systematically measure and evaluate each step of the nursing process. This tool consisted of 28 questions, each of which was divided into five assessment questions, six diagnosis questions, six planning questions, five implementation questions and six evaluation questions. Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“not at all”) to 5 (“very much”). The measurement score ranged from 28 to 140 points, with higher scores indicating better nursing process performance. The cumulative variance contribution rate of the tool was 68.1 % and the Cronbach’s α value was 0.85 for all items. This study provides a basis for evaluating educational approaches in nursing curricula by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process. This approach can strengthen the connection between education and clinical practice and can be used not only as a tool to systematically evaluate the learning outcomes of nursing students but also as a standardized nursing process guide.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104165
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3118471195</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1471595324002944</els_id><sourcerecordid>3134301803</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c265t-19a952d41605c1d7ef774d4a4f220b633dba577f686b7a274828bfd4e64563783</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1O3DAUha2qVYFpX6CLylI3bDL1vzOIDUKUVkKwgbXlxDeVR048tZMRs-M1-np9kjoKZcGiK9tX3znyPQehT5SsKaHq63Y9wC6tGWGiDARV8g06prXmlWSMvy13oWklN5IfoZOct6SIiFbv0RHfCKY4Y8doup1S9sNPvEuxhZzxDlIXU2-HFnAPNk8JehhGPMYYcGMzOBwH3IQY-z9PvzNOsPfzcLSPcYj94Qxf4L0N3vnxgO3gChC8bXxY3jYcss8f0LvOhgwfn88Vevh2dX_5vbq5u_5xeXFTtUzJsaIbu5HMlc2IbKnT0GktnLCiY4w0inPXWKl1p2rVaMu0qFnddE6AElJxXfMVOl18y3a_Jsij6X1uIQQ7QJyy4ZTWJSNaIlqhL6_QbZxS-e9MccEJrQkvFFuoNsWcE3Rml3xv08FQYuZSzNbMpZi5FLOUUkSfn62npgf3IvnXQgHOFwBKFnsPyeTWQ2nA-QTtaFz0__P_C9GxnyE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3134301803</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Nursing process performance measurement tool based on bloom’s revised taxonomy: A validity and reliability analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><creator>Lee, Ji Sun</creator><creatorcontrib>Lee, Ji Sun</creatorcontrib><description>This study aimed to develop a measurement tool that could evaluate educational approaches by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process and strengthening the connection between education and clinical practice. The nursing process is a core component of nursing practice and supports nurses and nursing students in systematically performing the problem-solving process necessary for patient health management. Cross-sectional, methodological study. A nursing process performance measurement tool that could measure the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process was developed based on Anderson’s and Bloom’s revised taxonomy. The data for this study were collected from July to August 2023 at four universities in South Korea. The reliability and validity of the measurement tool were evaluated through a survey conducted on 406 nursing students. Participants were third- and fourth-year nursing students with clinical practice experience, recruited through purposive sampling. The developed tool was designed to systematically measure and evaluate each step of the nursing process. This tool consisted of 28 questions, each of which was divided into five assessment questions, six diagnosis questions, six planning questions, five implementation questions and six evaluation questions. Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“not at all”) to 5 (“very much”). The measurement score ranged from 28 to 140 points, with higher scores indicating better nursing process performance. The cumulative variance contribution rate of the tool was 68.1 % and the Cronbach’s α value was 0.85 for all items. This study provides a basis for evaluating educational approaches in nursing curricula by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process. This approach can strengthen the connection between education and clinical practice and can be used not only as a tool to systematically evaluate the learning outcomes of nursing students but also as a standardized nursing process guide.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1471-5953</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1873-5223</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5223</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104165</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39426322</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Scotland: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Classification ; Clinical Competence - standards ; Clinical medicine ; Clinical nursing ; Cognitive ability ; Cognitive assessment ; Cognitive Processes ; Communication Skills ; Competence ; Content Validity ; Critical Thinking ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Curricula ; Curriculum as Topic ; Developmental Stages ; Disease management ; Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate ; Educational measurement ; Educational Measurement - methods ; Educational Measurement - standards ; Evaluation ; Female ; Humans ; Learning ; Likert scale ; Likert Scales ; Male ; Measurement ; Medical diagnosis ; Nurses ; Nursing education ; Nursing process ; Nursing Process - classification ; Nursing Students ; Outcomes of Education ; Patients ; Performance evaluation ; Problem solving ; Process Education ; Professional practice ; Reliability ; Reproducibility of Results ; Republic of Korea ; Student Characteristics ; Students ; Students, Nursing - psychology ; Students, Nursing - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Taxonomy ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Nurse education in practice, 2024-11, Vol.81, p.104165, Article 104165</ispartof><rights>2024 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2024. Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c265t-19a952d41605c1d7ef774d4a4f220b633dba577f686b7a274828bfd4e64563783</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/3134301803?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,12846,27924,27925,30999,45995,64385,64387,64389,72469</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39426322$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lee, Ji Sun</creatorcontrib><title>Nursing process performance measurement tool based on bloom’s revised taxonomy: A validity and reliability analysis</title><title>Nurse education in practice</title><addtitle>Nurse Educ Pract</addtitle><description>This study aimed to develop a measurement tool that could evaluate educational approaches by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process and strengthening the connection between education and clinical practice. The nursing process is a core component of nursing practice and supports nurses and nursing students in systematically performing the problem-solving process necessary for patient health management. Cross-sectional, methodological study. A nursing process performance measurement tool that could measure the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process was developed based on Anderson’s and Bloom’s revised taxonomy. The data for this study were collected from July to August 2023 at four universities in South Korea. The reliability and validity of the measurement tool were evaluated through a survey conducted on 406 nursing students. Participants were third- and fourth-year nursing students with clinical practice experience, recruited through purposive sampling. The developed tool was designed to systematically measure and evaluate each step of the nursing process. This tool consisted of 28 questions, each of which was divided into five assessment questions, six diagnosis questions, six planning questions, five implementation questions and six evaluation questions. Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“not at all”) to 5 (“very much”). The measurement score ranged from 28 to 140 points, with higher scores indicating better nursing process performance. The cumulative variance contribution rate of the tool was 68.1 % and the Cronbach’s α value was 0.85 for all items. This study provides a basis for evaluating educational approaches in nursing curricula by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process. This approach can strengthen the connection between education and clinical practice and can be used not only as a tool to systematically evaluate the learning outcomes of nursing students but also as a standardized nursing process guide.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Clinical Competence - standards</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Clinical nursing</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Cognitive assessment</subject><subject>Cognitive Processes</subject><subject>Communication Skills</subject><subject>Competence</subject><subject>Content Validity</subject><subject>Critical Thinking</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>Curriculum as Topic</subject><subject>Developmental Stages</subject><subject>Disease management</subject><subject>Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate</subject><subject>Educational measurement</subject><subject>Educational Measurement - methods</subject><subject>Educational Measurement - standards</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Likert scale</subject><subject>Likert Scales</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Nursing education</subject><subject>Nursing process</subject><subject>Nursing Process - classification</subject><subject>Nursing Students</subject><subject>Outcomes of Education</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>Problem solving</subject><subject>Process Education</subject><subject>Professional practice</subject><subject>Reliability</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Republic of Korea</subject><subject>Student Characteristics</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Students, Nursing - psychology</subject><subject>Students, Nursing - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Taxonomy</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>1471-5953</issn><issn>1873-5223</issn><issn>1873-5223</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1O3DAUha2qVYFpX6CLylI3bDL1vzOIDUKUVkKwgbXlxDeVR048tZMRs-M1-np9kjoKZcGiK9tX3znyPQehT5SsKaHq63Y9wC6tGWGiDARV8g06prXmlWSMvy13oWklN5IfoZOct6SIiFbv0RHfCKY4Y8doup1S9sNPvEuxhZzxDlIXU2-HFnAPNk8JehhGPMYYcGMzOBwH3IQY-z9PvzNOsPfzcLSPcYj94Qxf4L0N3vnxgO3gChC8bXxY3jYcss8f0LvOhgwfn88Vevh2dX_5vbq5u_5xeXFTtUzJsaIbu5HMlc2IbKnT0GktnLCiY4w0inPXWKl1p2rVaMu0qFnddE6AElJxXfMVOl18y3a_Jsij6X1uIQQ7QJyy4ZTWJSNaIlqhL6_QbZxS-e9MccEJrQkvFFuoNsWcE3Rml3xv08FQYuZSzNbMpZi5FLOUUkSfn62npgf3IvnXQgHOFwBKFnsPyeTWQ2nA-QTtaFz0__P_C9GxnyE</recordid><startdate>202411</startdate><enddate>202411</enddate><creator>Lee, Ji Sun</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</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>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202411</creationdate><title>Nursing process performance measurement tool based on bloom’s revised taxonomy: A validity and reliability analysis</title><author>Lee, Ji Sun</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c265t-19a952d41605c1d7ef774d4a4f220b633dba577f686b7a274828bfd4e64563783</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Clinical Competence - standards</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Clinical nursing</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Cognitive assessment</topic><topic>Cognitive Processes</topic><topic>Communication Skills</topic><topic>Competence</topic><topic>Content Validity</topic><topic>Critical Thinking</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>Curriculum as Topic</topic><topic>Developmental Stages</topic><topic>Disease management</topic><topic>Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate</topic><topic>Educational measurement</topic><topic>Educational Measurement - methods</topic><topic>Educational Measurement - standards</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Likert scale</topic><topic>Likert Scales</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Nursing education</topic><topic>Nursing process</topic><topic>Nursing Process - classification</topic><topic>Nursing Students</topic><topic>Outcomes of Education</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>Problem solving</topic><topic>Process Education</topic><topic>Professional practice</topic><topic>Reliability</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Republic of Korea</topic><topic>Student Characteristics</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Students, Nursing - psychology</topic><topic>Students, Nursing - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Taxonomy</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lee, Ji Sun</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 Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</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>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Nurse education in practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lee, Ji Sun</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Nursing process performance measurement tool based on bloom’s revised taxonomy: A validity and reliability analysis</atitle><jtitle>Nurse education in practice</jtitle><addtitle>Nurse Educ Pract</addtitle><date>2024-11</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>81</volume><spage>104165</spage><pages>104165-</pages><artnum>104165</artnum><issn>1471-5953</issn><issn>1873-5223</issn><eissn>1873-5223</eissn><abstract>This study aimed to develop a measurement tool that could evaluate educational approaches by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process and strengthening the connection between education and clinical practice. The nursing process is a core component of nursing practice and supports nurses and nursing students in systematically performing the problem-solving process necessary for patient health management. Cross-sectional, methodological study. A nursing process performance measurement tool that could measure the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process was developed based on Anderson’s and Bloom’s revised taxonomy. The data for this study were collected from July to August 2023 at four universities in South Korea. The reliability and validity of the measurement tool were evaluated through a survey conducted on 406 nursing students. Participants were third- and fourth-year nursing students with clinical practice experience, recruited through purposive sampling. The developed tool was designed to systematically measure and evaluate each step of the nursing process. This tool consisted of 28 questions, each of which was divided into five assessment questions, six diagnosis questions, six planning questions, five implementation questions and six evaluation questions. Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“not at all”) to 5 (“very much”). The measurement score ranged from 28 to 140 points, with higher scores indicating better nursing process performance. The cumulative variance contribution rate of the tool was 68.1 % and the Cronbach’s α value was 0.85 for all items. This study provides a basis for evaluating educational approaches in nursing curricula by integrating the cognitive dimensions required at each stage of the nursing process. This approach can strengthen the connection between education and clinical practice and can be used not only as a tool to systematically evaluate the learning outcomes of nursing students but also as a standardized nursing process guide.</abstract><cop>Scotland</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>39426322</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104165</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1471-5953
ispartof Nurse education in practice, 2024-11, Vol.81, p.104165, Article 104165
issn 1471-5953
1873-5223
1873-5223
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3118471195
source MEDLINE; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present); ProQuest Central UK/Ireland
subjects Adult
Classification
Clinical Competence - standards
Clinical medicine
Clinical nursing
Cognitive ability
Cognitive assessment
Cognitive Processes
Communication Skills
Competence
Content Validity
Critical Thinking
Cross-Sectional Studies
Curricula
Curriculum as Topic
Developmental Stages
Disease management
Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate
Educational measurement
Educational Measurement - methods
Educational Measurement - standards
Evaluation
Female
Humans
Learning
Likert scale
Likert Scales
Male
Measurement
Medical diagnosis
Nurses
Nursing education
Nursing process
Nursing Process - classification
Nursing Students
Outcomes of Education
Patients
Performance evaluation
Problem solving
Process Education
Professional practice
Reliability
Reproducibility of Results
Republic of Korea
Student Characteristics
Students
Students, Nursing - psychology
Students, Nursing - statistics & numerical data
Surveys and Questionnaires
Taxonomy
Validity
title Nursing process performance measurement tool based on bloom’s revised taxonomy: A validity and reliability analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T12%3A15%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Nursing%20process%20performance%20measurement%20tool%20based%20on%20bloom%E2%80%99s%20revised%20taxonomy:%20A%20validity%20and%20reliability%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Nurse%20education%20in%20practice&rft.au=Lee,%20Ji%20Sun&rft.date=2024-11&rft.volume=81&rft.spage=104165&rft.pages=104165-&rft.artnum=104165&rft.issn=1471-5953&rft.eissn=1873-5223&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104165&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3134301803%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3134301803&rft_id=info:pmid/39426322&rft_els_id=S1471595324002944&rfr_iscdi=true