Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34322627›Full record

SynthesisJournal of preventive medicine and hygiene2021

Nursing students' experience of risk assessment, prevention and management: a systematic review.

Sara Dionisi, Marco DI Muzio, Noemi Giannetta, Emanuele DI Simone, Barbara Gallina, Christian Napoli, Giovanni Battista Orsi

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Civil Liability of Regional Health Services: The Case of the Piedmont Region.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

7 authors.

Sara DionisiDepartment of Biomedicine and Prevention, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Italy.
Marco DI MuzioDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
Noemi GiannettaDepartment of Biomedicine and Prevention, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Italy.
Emanuele DI SimoneDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
Barbara GallinaDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
Christian NapoliDepartment of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
Giovanni Battista OrsiDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAs a fundamental dimension of quality, the patient safety and healthcare workers safety in the healthcare environment depend on the ability of each healthcare workers (whether administrators or technicians) to reduce the probability of error. This review focused on nursing students. The aim was to assess level and determinants of knowledge about risk assessment, risk prevention and risk management of nursing students.

methodsA systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Two reviewers searched the bibliographic databases Pubmed, Scopus and Cinahl to collect all the available articles in English and Italian issued between 2015 and August 2019. To obtain an exhaustive query of search, the following keywords were combined through Boolean operators AND and OR: Clinical Risk Assessment, Nursing Education, Nursing Student*, Patient Safety. The authors assessed the quality of the evidence by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) method.

resultsTwelve papers are included. Although the literature on the nursing student's error is limited, their frequencies are worrying. Some authors have created a model of prevention of clinical error based on three level. However, the majority of nursing students don't feel confident with a patient safety. Many authors shown that patient safety education was delivery by lecture, laboratory or simulation sessions.

conclusionsThis review underlines the need to revise the nursing curriculum on patient safety and the need to think what educational methodology is the better for the student to create a safe care.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeRisk ManagementDelivery of Health CareHumansPatient SafetyRisk AssessmentStudents, NursingClinical riskNursing curriculumNursing studentsPatient safety

Identifiers

PMID34322627
PMCPMC8283624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.