Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38178050›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical education2024

The impact of train-the-trainer programs on the continued professional development of nurses: a systematic review.

Mette Andersen Nexø, Natassia Rosewood Kingod, Signe Hornsleth Eshøj, Emilie Mølholm Kjærulff, Ole Nørgaard, Tue Helms Andersen

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
30.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mette Andersen NexøDepartment of Education, Copenhagen University Hospital - Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 83, Herlev, Denmark. mette.andersen.nexoe@regionh.dk.
Natassia Rosewood KingodDepartment of Education, Copenhagen University Hospital - Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 83, Herlev, Denmark.
Signe Hornsleth EshøjDepartment of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, Building 24 Q, 1 Floor, Copenhagen K, Denmark.
Emilie Mølholm KjærulffDepartment of Education, Copenhagen University Hospital - Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 83, Herlev, Denmark.
Ole NørgaardDepartment of Education, Copenhagen University Hospital - Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 83, Herlev, Denmark.
Tue Helms AndersenDepartment of Education, Copenhagen University Hospital - Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 83, Herlev, Denmark.
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKSteno Diabetes Center · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

Novo Nordisk Foundation Award/grant number not available
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrain-the-trainer (TTT) programs are widely applied to disseminate knowledge within healthcare systems, but evidence of the effectiveness of this educational model remains unclear. We systematically reviewed studies evaluating the impact of train-the-trainer models on the learning outcomes of nurses.

methodsThe reporting of our systematic review followed PRISMA 2020 checklist. Records identified from MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and ERIC were independently screened by two researchers and deemed eligible if studies evaluated learning outcomes of a train-the-trainer intervention for trainers or trainees targeting nurses. Study quality was assessed with Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tools and data of study characteristics extracted (objective, design, population, outcomes, results). Heterogeneity of outcomes ruled out meta-analysis; a narrative synthesis and vote counting based on direction of effects (p < 0.05) synthesized the results. All records were uploaded and organized in EPPI-Reviewer.

resultsOf the 3800 identified records 11 studies were included. The included studies were published between 1998 and 2021 and mostly performed in the US or Northern Europe. Nine studies had quasi-experimental designs and two were randomized controlled trials. All evaluated effects on nurses of which two also included nurses' assistants. The direction of effects of the 13 outcomes (knowledge, n = 10; skills, n = 2; practice, n = 1) measured in the 11 included studies were all beneficial. The statistical analysis of the vote counting showed that train-the-trainer programs could significantly (p < 0.05) improve trainees' knowledge, but the number of outcomes measuring impact on skills or practice was insufficient for synthesis.

conclusionsTrain-the-trainer models can successfully disseminate knowledge to nurses within healthcare systems. Considering the nurse shortages faced by most Western healthcare systems, train-the-trainer models can be a timesaving and sustainable way of delivering education. However, new comparative studies that evaluate practice outcomes are needed to conclude whether TTT programs are more effective, affordable and timesaving alternatives to other training programs.

trial registrationThe protocol was registered in Research Registry ( https://www.researchregistry.com , unique identifying number 941, 29 June 2020).

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareLearningClinical CompetenceEducational StatusHumansModels, EducationalKnowledgeLearning outcomesNursesSystematic reviewTrain-the-trainer

Identifiers

PMID38178050
PMCPMC10768131
OpenAlexW4390579089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.