Purpose

To assess the validity of a Written Clinical Reasoning Prompt (WCRP) to help nursing students’ clinical reasoning (CR).

Method

This is a methodological study of translation and cross-cultural adaptation into Brazilian Portuguese of instruments that aim to promote CR improvement, composed of (1) WCRP; (2) two case studies; (3) a questionnaire about students’ perceptions during decision-making in case studies; (4) a scoring rubric for correcting case studies. For translation and cross-cultural adaptation, stages 1–8 of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) Consortium Network were adopted. Agreement values among experts >80% and content validity coefficient (CVC) > 0.8 were considered satisfactory. For the pretest, a randomized clinical trial was carried out with 24 nursing students (intervention group, n = 14, using the WCRP to solve case studies; control group, n = 10, without using the WCRP).

Findings

The WCRP was translated and adapted into Brazilian Portuguese, requiring minimal adjustments to obtain agreement among the judges above 80% and CVC above 0.80. Regarding face validation, an adequate agreement was obtained in the assessment by students. There was no difference in the accuracy of nursing diagnoses between the intervention and control groups in the pretest.

Conclusion

The WCRP was translated and adapted into Brazilian Portuguese and had adequate face and content validity estimates; however, there was no association with improving nursing students’ diagnostic accuracy.

Implications for nursing practice

The translated and adapted versions of all instruments into Brazilian Portuguese had adequate evidence of content and face validity. The use of WCRP was not associated with a significant improvement in nursing students’ diagnostic accuracy. New studies with larger samples, a sample power of at least 80%, and a level of significance of 5% are needed.