Level of Evidence Criteria

1. RECEIVED FOR DEVELOPMENT (CONSULTATION FROM DDC)

1.1 Label Only

This level is intended primarily for submission by organized groups rather than individuals. The label is clear, stated at a basic level and is supported by literature references and these are identified.

1.2 Label and Definition

The label is clear and stated at a basic level. The definition is consistent with the label. The label and definition are distinct from other NANDA-I diagnoses and definitions. The definition differs from the defining characteristics and label, and these components are not included in the definition. At this stage, the diagnosis must be consistent with the current NANDA-I definition of nursing diagnosis. The label and definition are supported by literature references and these are identified,

2. ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION AND INCLUSION IN THE NANDA-I TAXONOMY

References are cited for the label, definition, each defining characteristic or risk factor, and each related factor. In addition, it is required that nursing outcomes and nursing interventions from a standardized nursing terminology (e.g., NOC, NIC) be provided for each diagnosis. If approved, the diagnosis will be forwarded to the Taxonomy Committee for classification within the NANDA-I taxonomy.

2.2 Concept Analysis

The criteria in 2.1 are met. In addition, a narrative review of relevant literature, culminating in a written concept analysis, is required to demonstrate the existence of a substantive body of knowledge underlying the diagnosis. The literature review / concept analysis supports the label and definition, and includes discussion and support of the defining characteristics, risk factors (for risk diagnoses) or related factors (for actual diagnoses).

2.3 Consensus Studies Related to Diagnosis Using Experts

The criteria in 2.1 are met. Studies include those soliciting expert opinion, Delphi, and similar studies of diagnostic components in which nurses are subjects.

3.1 Literature Synthesis

The criteria in 2.2 are met. The synthesis is in the form of an integrated review of the literature. Search terms / MESH terms used in the review are provided to assist future researchers.

3.2 Clinical Studies Related to Diagnosis, But Not Generalizable to the Population

The criteria in 2.2 are met. The narrative includes a description of studies related to the diagnosis, which includes defining characteristics or risk factors, and related factors. Studies may be qualitative in nature, or quantitative studies using nonrandom samples in which patients are subjects.

3.3 Well-Designed Clinical Studies with Small Sample Sizes

The criteria in 2.2 are met. The narrative includes a description of studies related to the diagnosis, which includes defining characteristics or risk factors, and related factors. Random sampling is used in these studies, but the sample size is limited.

3.4 Well-Designed Clinical Studies with Random Sample of Sufficient Size to Allow for Generalizability to the Overall Population

The criteria in 2.2 are met. The narrative includes a description of studies related to the diagnosis, which includes defining characteristics or risk factors, and related factors. Random sampling is used in these studies and the sample size is sufficient to allow for generalizability of results to the overall population.

Diagnosis Submission Quick Links
Preparing Your Submission
Submission Review
Submissions Pending
Taxonomy Updates
Taxonomy Updates – Members Only