This study examined the effects of a hospice palliative education program for adults on their perception of hospice, attitude towards death, and meaning of life. Methods: This study was a quasi-experimental study with a non-equivalent control group design. Among 43 participants, 22 were assigned to the non-equivalent experimental group and 21 to the control group. The hospice palliative education program comprised 10 three-hour sessions, each given once a week. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics, t-test and χ 2 -test using SPSS version 20.0. Results: Significant differences between the experimental and control groups were observed in their perception of hospice (t=6.63, P＜0.001), attitude towards death (t=2.36, P=0.023), and meaning of life (t=5.06, P＜0.001). Conclusion: The results indicate that this education program could positively affect the perception of hospice, attitude toward death, and meaning of life in adults. More studies are warranted to explore the effects of this education program for various age groups so that it may help more people get positive understanding of hospice palliative care. The results suggest this program could help improve the negative perception of hospice, negative attitude towards death and meaning of life that are generally held by the public.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify factors with nursing students's confidence in performing fundamental nursing skills. The focus was on professionalism and self-efficacy. Method: For the sample 258 fourth graders of nursing students were recruited in two universities located in Gyeongnam or Ulsan. Data were analyzed using t-test, Pearson's correlation coefficients, and hierarchical multiple regression. Results: The mean score for confidence in performing fundamental nursing skills was 3.71±0.58. Nursing professionalism and self-efficacy were positively correlated with confidence in performing fundamental nursing skills. Analysis using multiple regression showed that 27% of factors predicting confidence in performance of fundamentals of nursing practice (F=16.43, p<.001) included nursing professionalism (β=.37, p<.001), self-expression (β=.15, p=.009), and self-efficacy (β=.14, p=.029). Conclusion: Findings show that nursing professionalism is one of the major factors influencing confidence in performing fundamental nursing skills. In order to improve the confidence in performing fundamental nursing skills, it is necessary to establish effective educational strategies that firmly enhance nursing professionalism and improve self-efficacy in nursing students.

BACKGROUND Cybercivility, the practice of what to say and how to say it in online environments, encourages individuals to treat each other with respect. However, the anonymity of online communities may lead some individuals to behave in ways that violate social and cultural norms. These individuals treat others with a lack of regard and even bully others in faceless online confrontations. This practice of cyberincivility can be found across the internet, on commercial sites, and in schools offering online courses. Research on cybercivility and cyberincivility has increased in the United States, where instruments have been developed to measure the impact of cyberincivility in health profession education. However, there is no available instrument that measures nursing students’ online behaviors in South Korea. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a Korean version of the Academic Cyberincivility Assessment Questionnaire developed in the United States. METHODS Data were collected from 213 nursing students in three South Korean colleges. The Academic Cyberincivility Assessment Questionnaire developed by De Gagne and colleagues was adapted to measure students’ knowledge of cybercivility, and their experiences with and acceptability of cyberincivility. Content validity was tested using the content validity index (CVI). Criterion validity was tested using the digital citizenship scale. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach alpha. The goodness-of-fit of construct validity was determined through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. RESULTS The CVI was 0.8 or higher for all items. Kuder–Richardson Formula 20, measuring reliability of the knowledge scale, was 0.22 and Cronbach alpha, measuring reliability of the experience scale, was .96. The goodness-of-fit of the model was Chi square=5568.63 (<i>P</i>&lt;.001), the comparative fit index (CFI) was 0.92, and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.08, which satisfied the criteria. The reliability of the acceptability scale was .96, and the goodness-of-fit indices satisfied the criteria (minimum Chi square/df=2.34, Tucker-Lewis Index =0.92, incremental fit index=0.93, root mean square residual=0.05, CFI=0.93, and RMSEA=0.08). CONCLUSIONS This study extended and reevaluated the US version of cybercivility scales in a culturally distinct context. The three dimensions of cybercivility include knowledge, experience, and acceptability. Acceptability is well-validated as a dimension, whereas the knowledge dimension requires reexamination for application to Koreans. A revision of the instrument is needed that considers the cultural differences between South Korea and the United States. This paper calls for more attention to be paid to contextualized cybercivility scales among health professions in countries outside the United States.

Background Cybercivility, the practice of what to say and how to say it in online environments, encourages individuals to treat each other with respect. However, the anonymity of online communities may lead some individuals to behave in ways that violate social and cultural norms. These individuals treat others with a lack of regard and even bully others in faceless online confrontations. This practice of cyberincivility can be found across the internet, on commercial sites, and in schools offering online courses. Research on cybercivility and cyberincivility has increased in the United States, where instruments have been developed to measure the impact of cyberincivility in health profession education. However, there is no available instrument that measures nursing students’ online behaviors in South Korea. Objective The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a Korean version of the Academic Cyberincivility Assessment Questionnaire developed in the United States. Methods Data were collected from 213 nursing students in three South Korean colleges. The Academic Cyberincivility Assessment Questionnaire developed by De Gagne and colleagues was adapted to measure students’ knowledge of cybercivility, and their experiences with and acceptability of cyberincivility. Content validity was tested using the content validity index (CVI). Criterion validity was tested using the digital citizenship scale. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach alpha. The goodness-of-fit of construct validity was determined through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Results The CVI was 0.8 or higher for all items. Kuder–Richardson Formula 20, measuring reliability of the knowledge scale, was 0.22 and Cronbach alpha, measuring reliability of the experience scale, was .96. The goodness-of-fit of the model was Chi square=5568.63 (P<.001), the comparative fit index (CFI) was 0.92, and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.08, which satisfied the criteria. The reliability of the acceptability scale was .96, and the goodness-of-fit indices satisfied the criteria (minimum Chi square/df=2.34, Tucker-Lewis Index =0.92, incremental fit index=0.93, root mean square residual=0.05, CFI=0.93, and RMSEA=0.08). Conclusions This study extended and reevaluated the US version of cybercivility scales in a culturally distinct context. The three dimensions of cybercivility include knowledge, experience, and acceptability. Acceptability is well-validated as a dimension, whereas the knowledge dimension requires reexamination for application to Koreans. A revision of the instrument is needed that considers the cultural differences between South Korea and the United States. This paper calls for more attention to be paid to contextualized cybercivility scales among health professions in countries outside the United States.

No abstract