ArticleInternational journal of nursing sciences2017
Improve nursing in evidence-based practice: How Chinese nurses' read and comprehend scientific literature.
Article in International journal of nursing sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The sustainability effects of two reading interventions on Saudi nursing students' comprehension of scientific research.PloS one · 2024Trial
- Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Research Utilization Among Clinical Nurses and Midwives: Empirical Research Quantitative.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor: Evidence-based practice for nursing profession: Barriers and teaching strategies solutions.International journal of nursing sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine Chinese nurses' practice of reading and understanding scientific literature and elucidate the motivating and deterring factors.
methodsThis is a cross-sectional study conducted between March and June 2015. A random sample of 853 full-time registered nurses from three tertiary and two secondary hospitals in China filled out a set of self-administered questionnaires, including literature habit questionnaire(41 items), the situational motivation scale and the socio-demographic and professional characteristics questionnaire(15 items).
resultsSignificant majority (89.2%) of the respondents reported perception of barriers to keeping up to date with literature. The language barrier was the most prominent, followed by poor presentation and readability of articles. Using simpler language when writing articles, improving ones' foreign language proficiency and getting education or training on nursing research were raised as the top facilitators. Additionally, reading and understanding literature was significantly associated with the nurses' educational background, motivation, genders and work settings.
conclusionsThe survey of the current status of literature education among Chinese nurses suggests that providing protected time, training for critical thinking, and incentive mechanisms will help improve nurses' engagement in literature and create a culture of academic inquiry.
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.