2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10553
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of the Turkish version of the second victim experience and Support Tool (T-SVEST)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Absence as a result of the experience of an adverse event concerned 7.1% of the respondents [6]. To date, the SVEST study has been conducted in Italy, Spain, Denmark, Turkey, Malaysia and China, among others [16][17][18][19].…”
Section: Psychological and Physical Symptoms Of Second Victimsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Absence as a result of the experience of an adverse event concerned 7.1% of the respondents [6]. To date, the SVEST study has been conducted in Italy, Spain, Denmark, Turkey, Malaysia and China, among others [16][17][18][19].…”
Section: Psychological and Physical Symptoms Of Second Victimsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…19 SV has mainly been measured using the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST) developed by Burlinson et al 20 The SVEST has seven dimensions (psychological distress, physical distress, colleague support, supervisor support, institutional support, non-work-related support and professional self-efficacy) and two outcome variables (turnover intentions and absenteeism). This instrument has been translated and validated in Korea, 21 China, 22 Italy, 23 Denmark, 24 Germany, 19 Argentina, 25 Malaysia 26 and Turkey, 27 with psychological distress being the most prevalent symptom. Another SV instrument measures post-traumatic stress.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This instrument measures health care professionals' distress after an error occurs and assesses the quality of support resources and the outcomes for staff. The instrument has been validated in different countries (Brunelli et al, 2021 ; Chen et al, 2019 ; Kim et al, 2020 ; Knudsen et al, 2021 ; Koca et al, 2022 ; Mohd Kamaruzaman et al, 2022 ; Santana‐Domínguez et al, 2021 , 2022 ; Scarpis et al, 2021 ). Ajoudani et al also evaluated the psychometric properties of this instrument in Urmia, Iran, on 298 nurses working in general wards.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%