Current practices for assessing clinical judgment in nursing students and new graduates: A scoping review

被引:12
作者
Bussard, Michelle E. [1 ]
Jessee, Mary Ann [2 ]
El-Banna, Majeda M. [3 ]
Cantrell, Mary Ann [4 ]
Alrimawi, Intima [5 ]
Marchi, Nadine M. [6 ]
Gonzalez, Lisa I. [7 ]
Rischer, Keith [8 ]
Coy, Michelle L. [9 ]
Poledna, Mari [10 ]
Lavoie, Patrick [11 ,12 ]
机构
[1] Bowling Green State Univ, Sch Nursing, 924 Ridge St, Bowling Green, OH 43403 USA
[2] Vanderbilt Univ, Sch Nursing, 461 21st Ave South, Nashville, TN 37240 USA
[3] George Washington Univ, Sch Nursing, 45085 Univ Dr,Innovat Hall, Ashburn, VA 20147 USA
[4] Villanova Univ, Coll Nursing, 800 E Lancaster Ave, Villanova, PA 19085 USA
[5] Georgetown Univ, Sch Nursing, St Marys Hall,3700 Reservoir Rd NW, Washington, DC 20057 USA
[6] Inova Hlth Syst, 3300 Gallows Rd, Falls Church, VA 22042 USA
[7] Coll Southern Maryland, 8730 Mitchell Rd, La Plata, MD 20646 USA
[8] KeithRN, 6417 Penn Ave S,Ste 8,iPMB 1383, Minneapolis, MN 55423 USA
[9] Mayo Clin, Coll Med & Sci, 200 First St Southwest, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[10] Arizona State Univ, Phoenix, AZ 85004 USA
[11] Univ Montreal, Fac Nursing, 2375 Chem Cote St Catherine, Montreal, PQ H3C 3J7, Canada
[12] Montreal Heart Inst, Res Ctr, 5000 Belanger St, Montreal, PQ H1T 1C8, Canada
关键词
Clinical judgment; Clinical reasoning; Critical thinking; Clinical decision-making; Assessment; Education; Nursing; Students; New graduate nurses; HIGH-FIDELITY SIMULATION; CRITICAL THINKING; DECISION-MAKING; COMPETENCE; MODEL; NOVICE; IMPACT; RELIABILITY; AWARENESS; EDUCATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.nedt.2023.106078
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Objective: To map current assessment practices for learning outcomes related to nurses' clinical judgment from undergraduate education to entry to practice. Design: Scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta -Analyses (PRISMA). Data sources: Electronic databases-Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL Complete; EBSCOhost), EMBASE (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), and Web of Science (Social Sciences Citation Index, Citation Index Expanded)-using a combination of descriptors and keywords related to nursing students, newly graduated nurses, clinical judgment and related terms (e.g., critical thinking, clinical reasoning, clinical decision-making, and problem-solving), and assessment. Methods: Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and, for each outcome relevant to clinical judgment, the concept, definition and framework, assessment tool, and the number and schedule of assessments. Data were synthesized narratively and using descriptive statistics. Results: Most of the 52 reviewed studies examined the outcome of a discrete educational intervention (76.9 %) in academic settings (78.8 %). Only six studies (11.5 %) involved newly graduated nurses. Clinical judgment (34.6 %), critical thinking (26.9 %), and clinical reasoning (9.6 %) were the three most frequent concepts. Three assessment tools were used in more than one study: the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (n = 22, 42.3 %), the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (n = 9, 17.3 %), and the Health Science Reasoning Test (n = 2, 3.8 %). Eleven studies (21.2 %) used assessment tools designed for the study. Conclusion: In addition to a disparate understanding of underlying concepts, there are minimal published studies on the assessment of nursing students and nurses' clinical judgment, especially for longitudinal assessment from education to clinical practice. Although there is some existing research on this topic, further studies are necessary to establish valid and reliable clinical competency assessment methods that effectively integrate clinical judgment in clinical situations at relevant time points.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 105 条
[1]  
Advisory Board, 2020, Critical Thinking Diagnostic
[2]   Impact of social problem-solving training on critical thinking and decision making of nursing students [J].
Ahmady, Soleiman ;
Shahbazi, Sara .
BMC NURSING, 2020, 19 (01)
[3]  
Alamouti H.D., 2020, Advances in Nursing & Midwifery, V29, P24, DOI [10.29252/anm-29791, DOI 10.29252/ANM-29791]
[4]   Comparing the Effects of Simulation-Based and Traditional Teaching Methods on the Critical Thinking Abilities and Self-Confidence of Nursing Students [J].
Alamrani, Mashael Hasan ;
Alammar, Kamila Ahmad ;
Alqahtani, Sarah Saad ;
Salem, Olfat A. .
JOURNAL OF NURSING RESEARCH, 2018, 26 (03) :152-157
[5]   The effectiveness of high-fidelity simulation on undergraduate nursing students' clinical reasoning-related skills: A systematic review [J].
Alshehri, Fadiyah D. ;
Jones, Sophie ;
Harrison, Denise .
NURSE EDUCATION TODAY, 2023, 121
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2021, ESSENTIALS CORE COMP
[7]  
[Anonymous], Health Sciences Reasoning Test (HRST)
[8]  
Anthony C E, 1993, Nurs Manage, V24, P32
[9]   Effect of High-Fidelity Simulation on Clinical Judgment Among Nursing Students [J].
Ayed, Ahmad ;
Khalaf, Inaam A. ;
Fashafsheh, Imad ;
Saleh, Ali ;
Bawadi, Hala ;
Abuidhail, Jamila ;
Thultheen, Imad ;
Joudallah, Hasan .
INQUIRY-THE JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION PROVISION AND FINANCING, 2022, 59
[10]   A review of clinical decision making: models and current research [J].
Banning, Maggi .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2008, 17 (02) :187-195