Academic partnerships in transforming nursing and midwifery education in Africa: a systematic scoping review protocol.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI:10.1186/s13643-024-02664-4
Claudine Muraraneza, Donatilla Mukamana, Godfrey Katende, Oliva Bazirete, Liz Wolvaardt
{"title":"Academic partnerships in transforming nursing and midwifery education in Africa: a systematic scoping review protocol.","authors":"Claudine Muraraneza, Donatilla Mukamana, Godfrey Katende, Oliva Bazirete, Liz Wolvaardt","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02664-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In recent decades, the literature on global partnerships in nursing and midwifery education, to enhance the quality of education and produce competent graduates in the labor market, is on the rise in Africa. However, there is a gap regarding the best practices and barriers in the African context. This systematic scoping review aims to map the evidence on academic partnerships in transforming nursing and midwifery education in Africa.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review will be guided by Arksey and O'Malley's methodology framework through five stages: (1) Identifying the research question, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) study selection, (4) charting the data, and (5) collecting, summarizing, and reporting the results. A search will be conducted with the use of the following electronic databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Applied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar. Additional gray literature will be searched via the World Health Organization's website to locate relevant policies and guidelines. The search will be limited to work published in English from 2014 to 2023. All located resources will be exported to EndNote X8. All duplicates will be removed during when the abstracts are screened. Two independent reviewers will screen and extract the full text of the selected articles. Thematic analysis will be used to analyze data from this systematic scoping review.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Mapping the evidence on global partnerships in transforming nursing and midwifery education in Africa will outline the best practices and preferences for sustainable collaboration. The review will also highlight knowledge gaps and limitations that could inform future research projects.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>https://osf.io/h83cy.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"262"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11488283/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02664-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In recent decades, the literature on global partnerships in nursing and midwifery education, to enhance the quality of education and produce competent graduates in the labor market, is on the rise in Africa. However, there is a gap regarding the best practices and barriers in the African context. This systematic scoping review aims to map the evidence on academic partnerships in transforming nursing and midwifery education in Africa.

Methods: The review will be guided by Arksey and O'Malley's methodology framework through five stages: (1) Identifying the research question, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) study selection, (4) charting the data, and (5) collecting, summarizing, and reporting the results. A search will be conducted with the use of the following electronic databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Applied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar. Additional gray literature will be searched via the World Health Organization's website to locate relevant policies and guidelines. The search will be limited to work published in English from 2014 to 2023. All located resources will be exported to EndNote X8. All duplicates will be removed during when the abstracts are screened. Two independent reviewers will screen and extract the full text of the selected articles. Thematic analysis will be used to analyze data from this systematic scoping review.

Discussion: Mapping the evidence on global partnerships in transforming nursing and midwifery education in Africa will outline the best practices and preferences for sustainable collaboration. The review will also highlight knowledge gaps and limitations that could inform future research projects.

Systematic review registration: https://osf.io/h83cy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非洲护理和助产教育改革中的学术伙伴关系:系统性范围界定审查协议。
背景:近几十年来,关于护理和助产教育全球伙伴关系的文献在非洲不断增加,目的是提高教育质量,为劳动力市场培养合格的毕业生。然而,在非洲的最佳实践和障碍方面还存在差距。本系统性范围界定综述旨在对非洲护理和助产教育改革中学术合作的证据进行摸底:综述将以 Arksey 和 O'Malley 的方法框架为指导,分为五个阶段:(1) 确定研究问题,(2) 确定相关研究,(3) 选择研究,(4) 绘制数据图表,(5) 收集、总结和报告结果。将使用以下电子数据库进行检索:护理和应用健康文献累积索引》(CINAHL)、PubMed、ScienceDirect 和 Google Scholar。还将通过世界卫生组织网站搜索其他灰色文献,以查找相关政策和指南。搜索范围仅限于 2014 年至 2023 年发表的英文文献。所有找到的资源都将导出到 EndNote X8 中。筛选摘要时将删除所有重复内容。两名独立审稿人将筛选并提取所选文章的全文。专题分析将用于分析本系统范围界定综述的数据:对非洲护理和助产教育改革中全球伙伴关系的证据进行分析,将概述可持续合作的最佳实践和偏好。综述还将强调知识差距和局限性,为未来的研究项目提供参考。系统综述注册:https://osf.io/h83cy。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
期刊最新文献
Choice of primary healthcare providers among population in urban areas of low- and middle-income countries-a protocol for systematic review of literature. Computer-assisted screening in systematic evidence synthesis requires robust and well-evaluated stopping criteria. Patient-related prognostic factors for function and pain after shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. The psychometric properties of instruments measuring ethical sensitivity in nursing: a systematic review. Barriers and facilitators to enrollment in pediatric clinical trials: an overview of systematic reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1