Dante Angelo, Masotta Vittorio, Paoli Ilaria, Caponnetto Valeria, Caples Maria, Laaksonen Mari, Kamenšek Tina, Petrucci Cristina, Lancia Loreto
Department of Life, Health & Environmental Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Abruzzo, Italy
Department of Life, Health & Environmental Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Abruzzo, Italy.
BMJ Open. 2025 Jul 13;15(7):e100054. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-100054.
To map the available evidence on genomic literacy among clinical nurses, nursing students and nursing faculty.
Systematic scoping review.
A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Academic Search Premier and OpenGrey. The review included studies published in English from 1 January 2001 to 28 May 2025.
Studies that referenced 'genomic literacy' in health-related or educational contexts and focused on nurses, nursing students or nursing faculty were included. Articles had to provide data on study design, population, setting, data collection tools and outcomes related to genomic literacy.
Two independent reviewers extracted and summarised data on study characteristics, including publication year, country, setting, aims, methods, population, assessment tools, outcomes and educational interventions. Findings were synthesised descriptively.
Of 1534 studies identified, 63 met the inclusion criteria. Most were observational (69.8%) and conducted in the USA (41.3%), focusing on clinical nurses (50.8%) in educational (47.6%) or clinical (46.0%) settings. Genomic literacy was predominantly assessed using ad hoc tools (46.0%) or the Genomic Nursing Concept Inventory, revealing low literacy levels. Mean scores ranged from 5.66 to 16.21 out of 31 (18.3%-52.3% correct answers). Educational interventions demonstrated effectiveness in improving genomic knowledge.
Genomic literacy among nurses, students and faculty remains low, with notable heterogeneity across countries. Many studies used non-standardised assessment tools with uncertain reliability and genomic literacy among nursing faculty remains underexplored. Educational interventions show promise in enhancing genomic literacy.
梳理临床护士、护理专业学生和护理教师群体中有关基因组知识素养的现有证据。
系统性综述。
在PubMed、CINAHL、Scopus、Web of Science、Academic Search Premier和OpenGrey数据库中进行全面检索。纳入2001年1月1日至2025年5月28日期间发表的英文研究。
在健康相关或教育背景下提及“基因组知识素养”且聚焦于护士、护理专业学生或护理教师的研究。文章必须提供有关研究设计、人群、环境、数据收集工具以及与基因组知识素养相关结果的数据。
两名独立评审员提取并总结了有关研究特征的数据,包括发表年份、国家、环境、目的、方法、人群、评估工具、结果和教育干预措施。研究结果进行描述性综合分析。
在检索到的1534项研究中,63项符合纳入标准。大多数研究为观察性研究(69.8%),在美国开展的研究占41.3%,聚焦于教育环境(47.6%)或临床环境(46.0%)中的临床护士(50.8%)。基因组知识素养主要通过特设工具(46.0%)或《基因组护理概念量表》进行评估,结果显示知识素养水平较低。平均得分在31分中为5.66至16.21分(正确答案占18.3% - 52.3%)。教育干预措施在提高基因组知识方面显示出有效性。
护士、学生和教师的基因组知识素养仍然较低,各国之间存在显著差异。许多研究使用的是非标准化评估工具,可靠性存疑,护理教师的基因组知识素养仍未得到充分研究。教育干预措施在提高基因组知识素养方面显示出前景。