ArticleBMC nursing2026
Evaluating the effectiveness of disaster nursing programs based on Bloom's taxonomy: a meta-analysis.
Article in BMC nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective disaster response demands rapid decision-making and high-quality nursing care. To establish and sustain disaster nursing competencies, structured education and training are indispensable. This study systematically evaluated the effectiveness of disaster nursing programs based on Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted using the keywords “disaster,” “nursing,” “education,” “training,” and “program,” covering publications from January 1, 1900, to August 6, 2024. A total of 12,076 articles were initially identified. After excluding non-interventional studies, books, posters, and studies without calculable effect sizes, 18 articles met the inclusion criteria. Data were analyzed using R version 4.4.2 to compute effect sizes, assess heterogeneity, and evaluate publication bias.
resultsThe overall effect size of disaster nursing programs for nurses and nursing students was large (Hedges’ g = 1.12, 95% CI [0.48, 1.77]). By Bloom’s taxonomy domains, the effect sizes were as follows: cognitive domain, g = 0.92 (95% CI [−0.30, 2.14]); affective domain, g = 0.86 (95% CI [0.21, 1.51]); and psychomotor domain, g = 1.19 (95% CI [0.49, 1.89]). For integrated outcomes combining knowledge, attitudes, and skills (other domain), the effect size was g = 0.89 (95% CI [−0.30, 4.08]).
conclusionDisaster nursing programs demonstrated the greatest effectiveness in enhancing psychomotor skills, reflecting improvements in practical performance. Strengthening disaster nursing competencies requires comprehensive educational strategies that integrate cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains while fostering higher-order thinking. These findings highlight the necessity of systematic curriculum design, evidence-based instructional methods, and rigorous evaluation frameworks to advance disaster nursing education.
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.