MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4401806853 · doi:10.11124/jbies-23-00201

Capability as a concept in advanced practice nursing and education: a scoping review

2024· review· en· W4401806853 sur OpenAlexaff
Martha M. Whitfield, Paulina Bleah, Jovina Concepcion Bachynski, Danielle Macdonald, Tracy Klein, Amanda Ross‐White, Mike Mimirinis, Rosemary Wilson

Notice bibliographique

RevueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2024
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueNursing Roles and Practices
Établissements canadiensCentre for Excellence in Mining InnovationQueen's University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNursingEngineering ethicsNursing practiceNurse educationMedicinePsychologyEngineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to map the literature about the concept of capability in advanced practice nursing education and practice to achieve greater clarity on the concept and its application. INTRODUCTION: Advanced practice nursing roles make up a growing segment of the global nursing workforce. Capability has been proposed as an overarching description of the attributes of advanced practice nursing roles within complex workplace environments. Capability includes knowing how to learn, and the ability to creatively integrate prior knowledge, skills, judgment, and experience in both new and familiar situations. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review looked at the literature about capability applied to advanced practice nursing in any setting globally. We were guided by the International Council of Nurses' definition of advanced practice nursing, which includes nurses with both graduate education and an expanded scope of practice. Drawing from an initial review of the literature, we used a working definition of capability, which was a combination of knowledge, skills, experience, and competencies that enables advanced practice nurses to provide appropriate care for patients in both known and unfamiliar clinical settings. We included literature about individual capability as a concept in any setting related to advanced practice nursing and education. METHODS: We searched 18 electronic databases and included qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods study design methodologies, reviews, and reports. The gray literature search included policy and practice documents from the World Health Organization, the International Council of Nurses, and websites of 48 nursing and health organizations. Two reviewers independently completed title and abstract screening prior to full-text review and data extraction. Conflicts were resolved via discussion or with a third reviewer. Extraction was completed by 2 reviewers using a piloted data extraction tool. Articles published in English from 1975 to the present were included. Sources in languages other than English were not included in the review due to the difficulties in accurately translating the concept of capability. RESULTS: Thirty-five sources were included in the review with publication dates from 2000 to 2023. Most sources originated from Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Sources included frameworks and clinical guidelines, peer-reviewed articles, and gray literature. Capability was discussed in a range of settings, including specialized clinical roles. Applications of capability in educational settings included the use of capability frameworks to guide nurse practitioner education, nursing practice doctorates, and postgraduate nurse practitioner training. Definitions of capability, where provided, were relatively consistent. Capability was proposed as a distinguishing characteristic of advanced practice nursing, as a descriptor of clinical proficiency that moved beyond competency, and as a framework that accounted for complexity in health care settings. CONCLUSION: Capability was used as a concept and framework to describe advanced practice nursing within complex practice environments that necessitate flexible approaches. Capability frameworks were applied holistically and to specific areas of practice or education, including in pregraduate and postgraduate advanced practice nursing education. Strategies for teaching and learning capability focused on flexibility, student-directed learning, and development of flexible learning pathways. SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT: A Norwegian-language version of the abstract of this review is available: http://links.lww.com/SRX/A58.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,045
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,676
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,045
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,084
Tête enseignante GPT0,563
Écart entre enseignants0,479 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations9
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJBI Evidence SynthesisMême sujetNursing Roles and PracticesTravaux en français237 207