Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Medicine and Health Sciences Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Medicine and Health Sciences

Information Literacy Data Group 1 And 2, Taralyn Mcmullan, Clista Clanton, Jo Ann Otts, Wilma Powell Stuart, Angela Rand Jan 2022

Information Literacy Data Group 1 And 2, Taralyn Mcmullan, Clista Clanton, Jo Ann Otts, Wilma Powell Stuart, Angela Rand

University Research Data and Datasets

Objective: This exploratory study examined perceived self-efficacy in information literacy skills in nursing students and discusses how collaborative relationships between nursing faculty and librarians can strengthen curricular efforts to support information literacy.

Methods: Using the Information Competency Assessment Instrument, a survey research design was used to determine student perceptions of their information literacy skills. Participants included nursing Baccalaureate, Master's and Doctoral students in each of these programs.

Results: The Information Competency Assessment Instrument identified low self-efficacy in the following categories: using an index, determining information needed for assignments, use of governmental documents, media sources, producers of information and citing sources. …


Condom Use Self-Efficacy Measure, Brian E. Mccabe, Natasha Schaefer Solle, Karina Gattamorta, Natalia Villegas, Rosina Cianelli, Victoria B. Mitrani, Nilda Peragallo Jan 2016

Condom Use Self-Efficacy Measure, Brian E. Mccabe, Natasha Schaefer Solle, Karina Gattamorta, Natalia Villegas, Rosina Cianelli, Victoria B. Mitrani, Nilda Peragallo

SOHNS supplementary Data and Tools

Condom self-efficacy is an important construct for HIV/STI prevention and intervention. This is a measure of self-efficacy for using condoms designed for Hispanic women (in Spanish or English). Either a 15-item measure or a brief 5-item version may be used. All items have a ten-point scale. Internal consistency of the full measure was good (Cronbach’s alpha = .92), as was the brief scale was (Cronbach’s alpha = .80). The total score of the brief scale was significantly correlated with the full scale total score, rs = .93, p < .001.