ArticleBMC medical education2024
Think-aloud approach combined with case-based learning in nursing teaching round for new nurses in cancer hospital.
Article 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 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.
- Evaluation of "nursing ethics-professional teaching" integrated ward-round in practicing nursing students: a practical study.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Demystifying HIV: academic training for undergraduate nursing students.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2026Article
- Core competencies and training needs of specialist-nurse clinical educators: a latent profile analysis.BMC nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe transition from nursing students to working as new nurses can be a challenging process. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of a pedagogical approach amalgamating the think-aloud approach and case-based learning in the instructional rounds for new nurses.
methodsUtilizing convenience sampling, new nurses were selected between 2020 and 2021 in China cancer hospital. A total of 98 participants agreed to participate, with 50 enrolled in 2020 as the control group and 48 in 2021 as the observation group. Across a span of weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11, each clinical department conducted six teaching rounds. The observation group engaged in teaching rounds combining the think-aloud approach with case-based learning, whereas the control group solely utilized case-based learning. Disparities in case analysis scores and critical thinking ability between the two groups were scrutinized, alongside an analysis of learning strategies and the observation group feedback.
resultsThe observation group exhibited superior case analysis scores (91.92 ± 6.33) and overall critical thinking ability scores (308.39 ± 35.88) in comparison to the control group, which scored (85.27 ± 5.39) and (275.11 ± 31.32) respectively, reflecting statistically significant variances (t = 1.868 ~ 6.361, P < 0.05). Predominant learning strategies employed in the observation group ranged from cognitive to meta-cognitive, followed by psychosocial strategies. During interviews focused on nurses' feedback on the learning process, themes emerged surrounding the enhancement of learning proficiency, invigoration of learning enthusiasm, and bolstering psychological well-being.
conclusionThe combination of think-aloud approach and case-based learning in nursing teaching rounds greatly improves the efficiency of training and the critical thinking acuity of new nurses. Concurrently, it facilitated an evaluation of learning strategies, thereby offering valuable insights for the nursing teaching rounds of new nurse.
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.