Inflammation Center, Helsinki University and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Department of Nursing Science, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Nurs Open. 2023 Apr;10(4):1985-2002. doi: 10.1002/nop2.1479. Epub 2022 Nov 20.
The aim of this review was to synthesize the instruments that assess nurse educators' competence.
A scoping review was conducted with the five-stage process informed by Arksey and O'Malley.
The predetermined search strategy was used including an additional hand search. The studies were selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria to answer the research questions followed: (1) "What instruments are used to assess nurse educators' competence?", (2) "How are the psychometric properties of nurse educators' competence instruments reported in the literature?". The thematic synthesis was used.
The literature search was conducted in January 2021 using the CINAHL, MEDLINE and ERIC databases from January 2000 to December 2020.
Of the 1,567 articles searched through, 25 met the inclusion criteria. A total of 19 instruments with 10 areas of competence were identified. Typical competence areas were pedagogical and nursing competence. In addition, leadership in managerial competence was included in several instruments. However, the theoretical backgrounds of the instruments varied and the psychometric properties were reported in varied ways in reviewed studies.
This study provides evidence about the valid and comprehensive assessment of nurse educators' competence, as competent nurse educators promote excellence in nursing education. To assess a nurse educators' competence comprehensively, a variety of theoretical backgrounds of this competence and more than one instrument for the measurement need to be considered. The selection of the instruments to assess nurse educators' competence should be based on the selected theoretical background and use of valid measurements.
This study was reported by following the reporting recommendations of the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).
No Patient or Public Contribution was applied, since research design was a scoping review.
本综述的目的是综合评估护士教育者能力的工具。
采用 Arksey 和 O'Malley 提出的五阶段过程进行范围综述。
采用预定的搜索策略，包括额外的手动搜索。根据纳入和排除标准选择研究，以回答以下研究问题：（1）“用于评估护士教育者能力的工具是什么？”，（2）“文献中如何报告护士教育者能力工具的心理测量学特性？”。使用主题综合法。
2021 年 1 月，使用 CINAHL、MEDLINE 和 ERIC 数据库，从 2000 年 1 月至 2020 年 12 月进行文献检索。
在 1567 篇文章中，有 25 篇符合纳入标准。共确定了 19 种具有 10 个能力领域的工具。典型的能力领域包括教学和护理能力。此外，领导力在管理能力中也包括在几个工具中。然而，这些工具的理论背景各不相同，在回顾的研究中，心理测量学特性的报告方式也各不相同。
本研究提供了证据表明可以对护士教育者的能力进行有效和全面的评估，因为有能力的护士教育者可以促进护理教育的卓越。要全面评估护士教育者的能力，需要考虑该能力的各种理论背景和多种测量工具。选择评估护士教育者能力的工具应基于所选的理论背景和有效测量的使用。
本研究遵循 PRISMA 扩展用于范围综述（PRISMA-ScR）的报告建议进行报告。
由于研究设计是范围综述，因此未应用患者或公众贡献。
