Technology-Supported Guidance Models Stimulating the Development of Critical Thinking in Clinical Practice: Mixed Methods Systematic Review

JMIR nursing Pub Date : 2022-02-17 DOI:10.2196/37380
Jaroslav Zlamal, Edith Roth Gjevjon, M. Fossum, Marianne Trygg Solberg, S. Steindal, Camilla Strandell-Laine, Marie Hamilton Larsen, A. A. Nes
{"title":"Technology-Supported Guidance Models Stimulating the Development of Critical Thinking in Clinical Practice: Mixed Methods Systematic Review","authors":"Jaroslav Zlamal, Edith Roth Gjevjon, M. Fossum, Marianne Trygg Solberg, S. Steindal, Camilla Strandell-Laine, Marie Hamilton Larsen, A. A. Nes","doi":"10.2196/37380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Nursing education has increasingly focused on critical thinking among nursing students, as critical thinking is a desired outcome of nursing education. Particular attention is given to the potential of technological tools in guiding nursing students to stimulate the development of critical thinking; however, the general landscape, facilitators, and challenges of these guidance models remain unexplored, and no previous mixed methods systematic review on the subject has been identified. Objective This study aims to synthesize existing evidence on technology-supported guidance models used in nursing education to stimulate the development of critical thinking in nursing students in clinical practice. Methods This mixed methods systematic review adopted a convergent, integrated design to facilitate thematic synthesis. This study followed the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Results We identified 3 analytical themes: learning processes implemented to stimulate critical thinking, organization of the learning process to stimulate critical thinking, and factors influencing the perception of the learning process. We also identified 4 guidance models, all based on facilitator or preceptorship models using tailored instructional or learning strategies and one or several technological tools that were either generic or custom-made for specific outcomes. The main facilitators of these technology-supported guidance models were nurse educators or nurse preceptors, and the main challenges in using technology-supported guidance models were the stress associated with technical difficulties or increased cognitive load. Conclusions Although we were able to identify 4 technology-supported guidance models, our results indicate a research gap regarding the use of these models in nursing education, with the specific aim of stimulating the development of critical thinking. Both nurse preceptors and nurse educators play a crucial role in the development of critical thinking among nursing students, and technology is essential for such development. However, technology-supported guidance models should be supervised to mitigate the associated stress. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/25126","PeriodicalId":73556,"journal":{"name":"JMIR nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/37380","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background Nursing education has increasingly focused on critical thinking among nursing students, as critical thinking is a desired outcome of nursing education. Particular attention is given to the potential of technological tools in guiding nursing students to stimulate the development of critical thinking; however, the general landscape, facilitators, and challenges of these guidance models remain unexplored, and no previous mixed methods systematic review on the subject has been identified. Objective This study aims to synthesize existing evidence on technology-supported guidance models used in nursing education to stimulate the development of critical thinking in nursing students in clinical practice. Methods This mixed methods systematic review adopted a convergent, integrated design to facilitate thematic synthesis. This study followed the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Results We identified 3 analytical themes: learning processes implemented to stimulate critical thinking, organization of the learning process to stimulate critical thinking, and factors influencing the perception of the learning process. We also identified 4 guidance models, all based on facilitator or preceptorship models using tailored instructional or learning strategies and one or several technological tools that were either generic or custom-made for specific outcomes. The main facilitators of these technology-supported guidance models were nurse educators or nurse preceptors, and the main challenges in using technology-supported guidance models were the stress associated with technical difficulties or increased cognitive load. Conclusions Although we were able to identify 4 technology-supported guidance models, our results indicate a research gap regarding the use of these models in nursing education, with the specific aim of stimulating the development of critical thinking. Both nurse preceptors and nurse educators play a crucial role in the development of critical thinking among nursing students, and technology is essential for such development. However, technology-supported guidance models should be supervised to mitigate the associated stress. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/25126
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
刺激临床批判性思维发展的技术支持指导模式:混合方法系统综述
背景护理教育越来越重视护理学生的批判性思维,因为批判性思维是护理教育的理想结果。特别注意技术工具在指导护生激发批判性思维发展方面的潜力;然而,这些指导模型的总体情况、推动者和挑战仍然没有得到探索,以前也没有发现对该主题的混合方法系统审查。目的本研究旨在综合现有的护理教育技术支持指导模式的证据,以刺激护理专业学生在临床实践中批判性思维的发展。方法该混合方法系统综述采用了趋同、综合的设计,以促进主题综合。这项研究遵循了乔安娜·布里格斯研究所证据综合手册的指导方针。结果我们确定了3个分析主题:为激发批判性思维而实施的学习过程、为激发批判性思考而组织的学习过程以及影响对学习过程感知的因素。我们还确定了4个指导模型,所有模型都基于促进者或指导者模型,使用量身定制的教学或学习策略以及一个或多个通用或针对特定结果定制的技术工具。这些技术支持的指导模式的主要推动者是护士教育者或护士指导者,使用技术支持的引导模式的主要挑战是与技术困难或认知负荷增加相关的压力。结论尽管我们能够确定4种技术支持的指导模式,但我们的结果表明,在护理教育中使用这些模式的研究存在差距,其具体目的是促进批判性思维的发展。护士导师和护士教育者在护理专业学生批判性思维的发展中都发挥着至关重要的作用,而技术对这种发展至关重要。然而,应监督技术支持的制导模型,以减轻相关压力。国际注册报告标识符(IRRID)RR2-10.2196/25126
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
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Unobtrusive Nighttime Movement Monitoring to Support Nursing Home Continence Care: Algorithm Development and Validation Study. Educators' perceptions and experiences of online teaching to foster caring professions students' development of virtual caring skills: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study. Assessing Visitor Expectations of AI Nursing Robots in Hospital Settings: Cross-Sectional Study Using the Kano Model. Calculating Optimal Patient to Nursing Capacity: Comparative Analysis of Traditional and New Methods. Remote Patient Monitoring at Home in Patients With COVID-19: Narrative Review.
×
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