Teaching in the Digital Age—Developing a Support Program for Nursing Education Providers: Design-Based Research
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Health care systems and the nursing profession worldwide are being transformed by technology and digitalization. Nurses acquire digital competence through their own experience in daily practice, but also from education and training; nursing education providers thus play an important role. While nursing education providers have some level of digital competence, there is a need for ongoing training and support for them to develop more advanced skills and effectively integrate technology into their teaching. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a needs-based support program for nursing education providers to foster digital competencies and to test this intervention. METHODS: We used a design-based research approach, incorporating iterative development with expert consultation to create and evaluate a support program for nursing education providers. Focus groups were conducted online to assess needs, and thematic content analysis was used to derive key insights. The support program was then refined through expert feedback and subjected to a feasibility and satisfaction test, with participant evaluations analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Six main categories emerged from the focus groups, highlighting key areas, including the use of digital technology, ongoing support needs, and the current state of digitalization in nursing education. The support program was developed based on these findings, with expert validation leading to adjustments in timing, content prioritization, and platform integration. Preliminary testing showed good overall satisfaction with the support program, although participants suggested improvements in content relevance and digital platform usability. CONCLUSIONS: Although the feasibility test showed high satisfaction with the support program, low participation rates and limited perceived knowledge gain were major concerns. The results suggest that while the program was well received, further refinements, including a focus on competency-based approaches and addressing workplace barriers, are needed to increase participation and effectiveness of such interventions. The findings of this research can be used as a basis for the development of similar programs in other educational and health care contexts.
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,022 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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