Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39666693›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Knowledge generation towards evidence-based practice and nursing competency.

Kennedy Diema Konlan, David Adedia, Felix K Nyande, Margaret Amenuke, Vivian Tackie, Judith A Anaman-Torgbor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Routinization in Nursing Care: An Integrated Review.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research
    Review
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.

Kennedy Diema KonlanDepartment of Public Health Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho, Ghana.
David AdediaSchool of Basic and Biomedical Sciences, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho, Ghana.
Felix K NyandeDepartment of Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho, Ghana.ORCID 0000-0002-4858-2287
Margaret AmenukeFaculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Central University, Accra, Ghana.
Vivian TackieDepartment of Public Health Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho, Ghana.
Judith A Anaman-TorgborDepartment of Public Health Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho, Ghana.ORCID 0000-0002-3951-4573

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis study aims to describe the nursing competency, research knowledge and skills of nurses in Ghana regarding evidence-based practice.

methodsThis nationwide descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted among 480 clinical nurses and nurse educators from both private and public institutions. Nurses were included in the study if they had a full-time or part-time appointment, were in active service, and had a valid Personal Identification Number from the Nursing and Midwifery Council of Ghana. The Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare mean rank scores between two groups, and the Kruskal Wallis H-test was used for the comparison.

resultsThirty percent of them rated their ability to formulate research questions, conduct literature search and retrieval, and critical analysis of scientific literature as fair or poor. Half of the nurses disagreed with changing to new methods, and more than half at least agreed with all the items measuring the use of evidence-based practice. One out of every 20 Nurses somewhat disagreed with formulating answerable research questions at work, and the same proportion disagreed or were neutral to integrating evidence into practice with their expertise. It was statistically significant that females (p-value = 0.001), married (p-value = 0.054), Christians (p-value<0.001), nurse educators (p-value<0.001) and part-time workers (p-value<0.001) were more likely to have higher mean scores on research knowledge and skills. The Kruskal Wallis test showed that research knowledge and skills (H = 97.281, p-value<0.001, df = 2), attitude towards evidence-based practice (H = 10.143, p-value = 0.006, df = 2), and nursing competencies (H = 9.041, p-value = 0.011, df = 2) differ for all the educational level of all nurses.

conclusionThe self-reported competencies in the various aspects of the research process and knowledge generation by both clinicians and nurse educators were good; however, the overall composite score revealed that nurses only had fair knowledge and skills in this regard. Nurses should be given the requisite training to appraise and evaluate nursing research for incorporation into nursing practice.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEvidence-Based NursingEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleGhanaHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursesSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID39666693
PMCPMC11637308

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.