Nursing Education & Department for Applied Health Science, University College South Denmark, Degnevej 17, 6705, Esbjerg Ø, Denmark.
Department of Oncology, Hospital of Lillebaelt, Beriderbakken 4, 7100, Vejle, Denmark.
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Mar 19;24(1):306. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05259-8.
To fully implement the internationally acknowledged requirements for teaching in evidence-based practice, and support the student's development of core competencies in evidence-based practice, educators at professional bachelor degree programs in healthcare need a systematic overview of evidence-based teaching and learning interventions. The purpose of this overview of systematic reviews was to summarize and synthesize the current evidence from systematic reviews on educational interventions being used by educators to teach evidence-based practice to professional bachelor-degree healthcare students and to identify the evidence-based practice-related learning outcomes used.
An overview of systematic reviews. Four databases (PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, ERIC and the Cochrane library) were searched from May 2013 to January 25th, 2024. Additional sources were checked for unpublished or ongoing systematic reviews. Eligibility criteria included systematic reviews of studies among undergraduate nursing, physiotherapist, occupational therapist, midwife, nutrition and health, and biomedical laboratory science students, evaluating educational interventions aimed at teaching evidence-based practice in classroom or clinical practice setting, or a combination. Two authors independently performed initial eligibility screening of title/abstracts. Four authors independently performed full-text screening and assessed the quality of selected systematic reviews using standardized instruments. Data was extracted and synthesized using a narrative approach.
A total of 524 references were retrieved, and 6 systematic reviews (with a total of 39 primary studies) were included. Overlap between the systematic reviews was minimal. All the systematic reviews were of low methodological quality. Synthesis and analysis revealed a variety of teaching modalities and approaches. The outcomes were to some extent assessed in accordance with the Sicily group`s categories; "skills", "attitude" and "knowledge". Whereas "behaviors", "reaction to educational experience", "self-efficacy" and "benefits for the patient" were rarely used.
Teaching evidence-based practice is widely used in undergraduate healthcare students and a variety of interventions are used and recognized. Not all categories of outcomes suggested by the Sicily group are used to evaluate outcomes of evidence-based practice teaching. There is a need for studies measuring the effect on outcomes in all the Sicily group categories, to enhance sustainability and transition of evidence-based practice competencies to the context of healthcare practice.
为了全面落实循证实践教学的国际公认要求，支持学生发展循证实践的核心能力，专业学士学位项目的教育工作者需要对循证教学和学习干预措施有系统的了解。本系统评价综述的目的是总结和综合目前关于教育工作者为专业学士学位医疗保健学生教授循证实践而使用的教育干预措施的系统评价证据，并确定所使用的与循证实践相关的学习结果。
系统评价综述。从 2013 年 5 月至 2024 年 1 月 25 日，检索了四个数据库（PubMed/Medline、CINAHL、ERIC 和 Cochrane 图书馆）。还检查了其他来源以查找未发表或正在进行的系统评价。纳入标准包括对本科护理、物理治疗师、职业治疗师、助产士、营养与健康以及生物医学实验室科学学生进行的评估旨在在课堂或临床实践环境中教授循证实践的教育干预措施的系统评价，或两者结合。两位作者独立进行了标题/摘要的初步资格筛选。四位作者独立进行了全文筛选，并使用标准化工具评估了选定系统评价的质量。使用叙述方法提取和综合数据。
共检索到 524 篇参考文献，纳入了 6 篇系统评价（共 39 项原始研究）。系统评价之间的重叠很小。所有的系统评价都具有较低的方法学质量。综合和分析揭示了各种教学模式和方法。结果在一定程度上根据西西里小组的类别进行了评估；“技能”、“态度”和“知识”。而“行为”、“对教育经验的反应”、“自我效能”和“对患者的益处”很少使用。
循证实践教学在本科医疗保健学生中广泛使用，并且使用和认可了各种干预措施。西西里小组建议的所有类别都没有用于评估循证实践教学的结果。需要进行研究以衡量所有西西里小组类别中的结果对效果的影响，以增强循证实践能力在医疗保健实践背景下的可持续性和过渡。
