Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27200224›Full record

ArticleHealthcare informatics research2016

Current Status of Nursing Informatics Education in Korea.

Eunjoo Jeon, Jeongeun Kim, Hyeoun-Ae Park, Ji-Hyun Lee, Jungha Kim, Meiling Jin, Shinae Ahn, Jooyeon Jun, Healim Song, Jeongah On and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare informatics research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Eunjoo JeonCollege of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Research Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Jeongeun KimCollege of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Research Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Hyeoun-Ae ParkCollege of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Research Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Ji-Hyun LeeResearch Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Jungha KimResearch Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Aeromedical Center, Korean Air, Busan, Korea.
Meiling JinResearch Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Shinae AhnResearch Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Department of Nursing, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Jooyeon JunResearch Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Healim SongResearch Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Department of Nursing, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Jeongah OnCollege of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Department of Nursing, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Hyesil JungCollege of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Yeong Joo HongResearch Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Global Healthcare Center, Korea Health Industry Development Institute, Cheongju, Korea.
Suran YimCollege of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.; Department of Nursing, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study presents the current status of nursing informatics education, the content covered in nursing informatics courses, the faculty efficacy, and the barriers to and additional supports for teaching nursing informatics in Korea.

methodsA set of questionnaires consisting of an 18-item questionnaire for nursing informatics education, a 6-item questionnaire for faculty efficacy, and 2 open-ended questions for barriers and additional supports were sent to 204 nursing schools via email and the postal service. Nursing schools offering nursing informatics were further asked to send their syllabuses. The subjects taught were analyzed using nursing informatics competency categories and other responses were tailed using descriptive statistics.

resultsA total of 72 schools (35.3%) responded to the survey, of which 38 reported that they offered nursing informatics courses in their undergraduate nursing programs. Nursing informatics courses at 11 schools were taught by a professor with a degree majoring in nursing informatics. Computer technology was the most frequently taught subject (27 schools), followed by information systems used for practice (25 schools). The faculty efficacy was 3.76 ± 0.86 (out of 5). The most frequently reported barrier to teaching nursing informatics (n = 9) was lack of awareness of the importance of nursing informatics. Training and educational opportunities was the most requested additional support.

conclusionsNursing informatics education has increased during the last decade in Korea. However, the proportions of faculty with degrees in nursing informatics and number of schools offering nursing informatics courses have not increased much. Thus, a greater focus is needed on training faculty and developing the courses.

Indexed as

Competency-Based EducationNursing Education ResearchNursing Informatics

Identifiers

PMID27200224
PMCPMC4871844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.