Scales used to evaluate critical thinking in nursing graduation

Samantha Reikdal Oliniski, Marineli Joaquim Méier, Gabriela De Souza Dos Santos
{"title":"Scales used to evaluate critical thinking in nursing graduation","authors":"Samantha Reikdal Oliniski, Marineli Joaquim Méier, Gabriela De Souza Dos Santos","doi":"10.5430/jnep.v13n8p52","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To analyze the scales used to measure critical thinking in undergraduate nursing students.Methods: Scoping review guided by Joanna Briggs Institute recommendations. Search carried out in November/2021 in five databases and two libraries. Descriptive data analysis.Results: Final sample had 57 articles. 91% (n = 53) adopted a validated scale to measure critical thinking in nursing students, and 9% (n = 4) combined two of them. California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory, California Critical Thinking Skills Test, and Health Science Reasoning Test were the most used scales. Studies with beginners prevailed, and there were several contexts and research themes. Simulation and concept mapping were the most evaluated teaching strategies, and 59.6% (n = 34) identified an increase in critical thinking after the intervention.Conclusions: Nursing managers and educators have 17 validated scales available to measure critical thinking, a fundamental element of clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":73866,"journal":{"name":"Journal of nursing education and practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of nursing education and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5430/jnep.v13n8p52","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the scales used to measure critical thinking in undergraduate nursing students.Methods: Scoping review guided by Joanna Briggs Institute recommendations. Search carried out in November/2021 in five databases and two libraries. Descriptive data analysis.Results: Final sample had 57 articles. 91% (n = 53) adopted a validated scale to measure critical thinking in nursing students, and 9% (n = 4) combined two of them. California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory, California Critical Thinking Skills Test, and Health Science Reasoning Test were the most used scales. Studies with beginners prevailed, and there were several contexts and research themes. Simulation and concept mapping were the most evaluated teaching strategies, and 59.6% (n = 34) identified an increase in critical thinking after the intervention.Conclusions: Nursing managers and educators have 17 validated scales available to measure critical thinking, a fundamental element of clinical practice.
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
护理专业毕业批判性思维量表的应用
目的:分析护理本科生批判性思维量表的使用情况。方法:在乔安娜·布里格斯研究所建议的指导下进行范围界定审查。2021年11月在五个数据库和两个图书馆进行了搜索。描述性数据分析。结果:最终样本共57篇。91%(n=53)的学生采用了经过验证的量表来衡量护理专业学生的批判性思维,9%(n=4)的学生将其中两种量表结合起来。加州批判性思维倾向量表、加州批判性思维技能测试和健康科学推理测试是使用最多的量表。对初学者的研究占了上风,有几个背景和研究主题。模拟和概念图是评价最高的教学策略,59.6%(n=34)的人认为干预后批判性思维增加。结论:护理管理人员和教育工作者有17种经过验证的量表可用于衡量批判性思维,这是临床实践的一个基本要素。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
“What are we doing here?”: Reflections on developing a transcultural “Road Map” for global menstrual hygiene management Analysis of nurses’ intention to resign and its reasons in a tertiary Grade-A hospital in Beijing during the post-pandemic era Utilizing learning communities to enhance classroom and clinical synergy across the curriculum Contraceptive use in the Gaza Strip: A systematic review Supporting graduate students’ skills with simulated experiences in a professional foundation course
×
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