Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35986584›Full record

ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2022

Scoping review: Diagnostic reasoning as a component of clinical reasoning in the U.S. primary care nurse practitioner education.

Sheila K Smith, Mary M Benbenek, Caitlin J Bakker, Denise Bockwoldt

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2022. 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. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors.

Sheila K SmithSchool of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5088-3185
Mary M BenbenekSchool of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5550-7824
Caitlin J BakkerDr. John Archer Library, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4154-8382
Denise BockwoldtSchool of Nursing, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7229-7291

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsDiagnostic Reasoning (DR) is an essential competency requiring mastery for safe, independent Nurse Practitioner (NP) practice, but little is known about DR content included in NP education programs. The aims of this study were to identify whether and how the concept of DR is addressed in NP education.

designWe conducted a scoping review on DR-related content and teaching innovations in U.S. primary care NP education programs, with implications for NP education programs worldwide. Concepts and principles with global applicability include: conducting focused and hypothesis-directed histories and exams, generating the problem statement, formulating the differential diagnosis, appropriate and relevant diagnostic testing, determining the working diagnosis and developing evidence-based, patient-centred management plans. DATA SOURCES: N = 1115 articles retrieved from Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL for the period 2005-2021. Forty-one scholarly articles met inclusion/exclusion criteria. REVIEW

methodsData were extracted, synthesized and grouped by theoretical frameworks, content included, educational interventions and assessment measures.

resultsMost articles provided descriptions of approaches for teaching NP clinical or diagnostic reasoning. Ten papers directly referenced the current science and theory of DR.

conclusionThe US NP education literature addressing DR is limited and demonstrates a lack of shared conceptualizations of DR. Whilst numerous components of DR are identifiable in the literature, a robust teaching/learning scholarship for DR has not yet been established in the US NP education literature. IMPACT: Whilst primary care NP education programs are beginning to incorporate DR education into their curricula, little research has been conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of educational outcomes. Increased integration of DR content into NP education is needed, including increased educational research on teaching DR competencies. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution was included in this review, as the public is generally not familiar with DR or its teaching approaches.

Indexed as

Clinical ReasoningNurse PractitionersCurriculumHumansPrimary Health CareProblem Solvingadvanced practice nursingclinical reasoningdiagnosisdiagnostic reasoningliterature reviewnurse practitionernurse practitioner educationnursingnursing curriculumscoping review

Identifiers

PMID35986584
PMCPMC9805128

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.