ArticleJournal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing2026
Evaluating Evidence-Based Practice and Quality Improvement Initiatives in the Nursing Literature Using a Critical Appraisal Tool.
Article in Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionReports of evidence-based practice (EBP) and quality improvement (QI) in nursing journals often vary in reporting quality, hindering translation into practice. A critical appraisal tool for evidence-based practice quality improvement (EBPQI) has recently been made available on the EQUATOR Network.
methodsA descriptive cross-sectional study of full-length articles (Jan-Jun 2025) from 28 nursing journals that accept reports of EBP and/or QI (per submission guidelines); each article was scored by two authors using the open-access critical appraisal tool for EBPQI.
resultsCollectively, these journals published 86 issues and 949 full-length articles; 30 (3.2%) articles were identified as EBP or QI reports and were published among 10 (33%) journals. Of these 30 articles, only 6 (20%) used appropriate EBP and/or QI methods and were therefore appraised using the EBPQI critical appraisal tool. Based on the EBPQI critical appraisal tool, the EBP and QI reports varied in how and to what extent they met EBPQI criteria.
conclusionVariation exists in journal guidance and reporting of EBP/QI initiatives. Consistent use of EBPQI criteria highlights the need for standardized reporting to improve transparency, transferability, and translation into practice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Transparent, standardized reporting of EBP and/or QI initiatives enables clinicians to appraise relevance and transferability to practice. Reporting aligned with recognized guidelines (or clear justification for deviations) is warranted.
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.