ArticleSystematic reviews2018
Measures assessing attributes of evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) competence among nurses: a systematic review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of the Specific Training Course for Competency in Doing Arterial Blood Gas Sampling in the Intensive Care Unit: Developing a Standardized Learning Curve according to the Procedure's Time and Socioprofessional Predictors.BioMed research international · 2021Trial
- [Critical factors for institutionalizing evidence-informed decision-making in healthcare organizationsFactores críticos para la institucionalización de la toma de decisiones basada en la evidencia en las organizaciones de salud].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2025Article
- Functionality of technical working groups in enabling evidence-informed decision-making within Malawi's Ministry of Health: a cross-sectional qualitative study.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- EIDM training as a key intervention among researchers to enhance research uptake and policy engagement: an evaluation study.Wellcome open research · 2023Article
- Nurses' Use of Personal Smartphone Technology in the Workplace: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- Measures of evidence-informed decision-making competence attributes: a psychometric systematic review.BMC nursing · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are growing professional expectations for nurses to engage in and develop competence in evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) due to opportunities for improved client and community outcomes and provision of the highest quality of care. However, EIDM is underdeveloped, with low implementation rates among nurses. The use of indicators to assess EIDM performance has potential to encourage nurses' engagement in EIDM through competence recognition and support assessment of strengths and competency gaps for individual nurses and organizations. Currently, the state of evidence regarding measures that assess EIDM competence attributes (i.e., knowledge, skills, beliefs/values, behaviors) among nurses is unknown. This systematic review aims to address this gap through a narrative synthesis of the characteristics and psychometric properties of EIDM competence measures.
methodsThe search strategy, developed in consultation with a Health Sciences Librarian, consists of online databases, contacting experts, hand searching reference lists, key journals, websites, conference proceedings, and grey literature. Studies will be included if the following criteria are met: (1) sample includes practicing nurses and data for nurses are reported separately; (2) conducted in any healthcare setting; (3) quantitative or mixed-methods design; (4) reports use or testing of a measure assessing EIDM competence attributes (i.e., knowledge, skills, attitudes/values, and/or behaviors); and (5) published in English. Screening will be conducted independently by two reviewers using a two-stage process: (1) title and abstract level; and (2) full-text level. Data extraction of study characteristics (e.g., sample, setting) will be conducted by a single reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second reviewer. Psychometric properties of acceptability, reliability, and validity evidence for each measure will be independently extracted by two reviewers. Data on measures will be synthesized narratively according to acceptability, number of validity evidence sources established, and reliability of scores. Data pertaining to population and healthcare setting will also be reported for each measure. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will provide a current understanding about the state of evidence with respect to EIDM competence measures in nursing to assist in determining potentially relevant and robust measures for use in different nursing practice settings. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Protocol registered in PROSPERO Registration #: CRD42018088754.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.