Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40909109›Full record

ArticleBiomedical engineering education2025

Assessment of a Bioengineering and Nursing Student Partnership for Medical Product Design.

Renee M Clark, April A Dukes, Lucille Sowko, Mark Gartner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical engineering education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Renee M ClarkDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, B-12 Benedum Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15261 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1782-073X
April A DukesEngineering Education Research Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6626-9331
Lucille SowkoSchool of Nursing, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2238-395X
Mark GartnerDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: In 2018, the Department of Bioengineering and the School of Nursing at University of Pittsburgh implemented an interdisciplinary partnership that integrated senior nursing students into the bioengineering capstone Senior Design course as part of a National Institutes of Health education grant. This two-semester course requires senior Bioengineering students to synthesize and extend principles from prior coursework toward the design a medical product meeting an unmet clinical need. Senior Design teams interact with clinicians, patients, and caregivers as part of the overall design process to understand the unique challenges of medical product design, including the requirements for regulatory approval. The teams develop iterative designs, fabricate prototypes, and perform both verification and validation testing to evaluate whether product performance criteria are met. Integrating nursing and bioengineering students was anticipated to provide opportunities for interprofessional learning, earlier and more frequent clinical input to the design process, and exposure to a spectrum of unmet clinical needs. Conversely, nursing students were anticipated to gain an understanding of the medical product design process, including regulatory requirements, to potentially empower future innovativeness. Methods: The impact of this interdisciplinary partnership on the anticipated outcomes was assessed over a five-year timeframe using research surveys and student interviews. The design self-efficacy survey was administered in a pre-post manner to assess changes in bioengineering and nursing students' confidence, motivation, success expectancy, and apprehension for performing design activity. Students' interprofessional collaborative development was also measured in a retrospective pre-post manner using the interprofessional collaborative competency attainment survey. Finally, a spectrum of student interviews was conducted to obtain perspectives about the interdisciplinary partnership. The data were analyzed using statistical and qualitative data methods. Results: The results were overwhelmingly positive for the partnership. The results make a strong case for such partnerships and suggest benefits for both student groups, including significant effects for design confidence and a multitude of collaborative competencies. For bioengineering students, the nursing students' clinical knowledge, perspectives, suggestions related to unmet clinical needs, and feedback were mentioned by 84% of interviewees as a partnership benefit. The nursing students cited interprofessional teamwork as the most valuable benefit (71% of interviewees) and indicated that it supported their ability to be innovative. Conclusions: The results make a strong case for engineering and nursing schools to pursue and establish partnerships between their students. This study is situated in the literature as part of an evolving trend of partnership between these two professions.

Indexed as

BioengineeringBiomedical engineeringInterprofessionalNursingPartnershipProduct designSelf-efficacy

Identifiers

PMID40909109
PMCPMC12405014

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.