Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34687153›Full record

ArticleNursing open2022

Effectiveness of a nursing innovation workshop at enhancing nurses' innovation abilities: A quasi-experimental study.

Limei Gao, Qiaocong Lu, Xiangchuan Hou, Jiefen Ou, Mingzhu Wang

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07710378 (Impact of Innovation Workshop-Integrated Outcome-Based Education on Critical Thinking and Innovation Skills Among Nursing Students), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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.

NCT07710378 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Innovation Workshop-Integrated Outcome-Based Education on Critical Thinking and Innovation Skills Among Nursing Students: A Mixed-Methods Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorIstanbul UniversityRan2026 to 2026Enrolled52ConditionsNursing EducationArmsWorkshop-Integrated Outcome-Based Education
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Limei GaoDepartment of Nursing, Affiliated Nanhai Hospital of Southern Medical University (People's Hospital of Nanhai District), Foshan, Guangdong, China.
Qiaocong LuDepartment of Nursing, Affiliated Nanhai Hospital of Southern Medical University (People's Hospital of Nanhai District), Foshan, Guangdong, China.
Xiangchuan HouDepartment of Nursing, Affiliated Nanhai Hospital of Southern Medical University (People's Hospital of Nanhai District), Foshan, Guangdong, China.
Jiefen OuDepartment of Nursing, Affiliated Nanhai Hospital of Southern Medical University (People's Hospital of Nanhai District), Foshan, Guangdong, China.
Mingzhu WangDepartment of Endocrinology, Affiliated Nanhai Hospital of Southern Medical University (People's Hospital of Nanhai District), Foshan, Guangdong, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9855-6741

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo investigate the effectiveness of nursing innovation workshop in enhancing clinical nurses' innovation ability and research ability in a tertiary hospital.

designA quasi-experimental study design.

methodsThirty-seven recruited nurses participated in a nursing innovation workshop for half a year in a tertiary hospital in Guangdong between June 2019 and March 2020. Questionnaire data on the nurses' self-rated innovation and research abilities were collected before the training and 3 months after completing the training. Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to analyse differences within the group before and after the intervention. The level for statistical significance was set at p ≤ .05 (two-tailed).

resultsNurses' self-rated innovation ability (p < .001, 95% confidence interval 12.79 to 15.05) and research ability (p < .001, 95% confidence interval 14.39 to 19.09) improved significantly after the training. Since the whole design lacked a control group, the study needs to be further verified in more hospitals and among more nurses.

Indexed as

CreativityNursesHospitalsHumansSurveys and Questionnairesinnovation abilitynursesresearch abilityworkshop

Identifiers

PMID34687153
PMCPMC8685873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.