Clinical validation of terminological subsets of the international classification for nursing practice: a scoping review.

Only 15 studies were included, and 93.3% were from Brazil, so the findings do not show what is happening in other countries. Most included work was master's dissertations and doctoral theses, with only one scientific article, so the published article evidence is thin. Ten studies used case studies, and the review text says sample sizes ranged from five to 25 cases, but the table also lists counts such as 3,244 consultations and 363 participants, so sample-size reporting is unclear. The included studies did not use common criteria for case studies, and some gave no references, so methods are not uniform. The review maps validation methods; it does not report patient outcomes, so it cannot show that a nursing diagnosis or intervention improves care. Some references were not found, and international authors may use different terms, so relevant studies could have been missed.

Do not read this as proof that ICNP nursing diagnoses or interventions improve patient outcomes. The review mapped validation methods, mostly small case studies, and did not test patient outcomes.