MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399508950 · doi:10.1111/wvn.12734

Knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs, and implementation of evidence‐based practice among nurses in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A scoping review

2024· review· en· W4399508950 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Adombire, Deborah Baiden, Martine Puts, Lisa M. Puchalski Ritchie, Mary Ani–Amponsah, Lisa Cranley

Bibliographic record

VenueWorldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLow and middle income countriesPsychologyMedical educationNursingDeveloping countryMedicineEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Over the past three decades, research studies on nurses' engagement in evidence-based practice (EBP) have been widely reported, particularly in high-income countries, with studies from these countries dominating literature reviews. As low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) continue to join the EBP movement, primary research has emerged over the past decade about nurses' engagement with EBP. AIMS: The aim of this scoping review was to identify the types and extent of published research regarding nurses' knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs, and implementation of EBP in LMICs. METHODS: The JBI scoping review methodology was used. Eight databases were searched up to November 2023. The review included primary studies (quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods) that reported the knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs, or implementation of EBP among nurses in LMICs. Included studies focused on registered nurses in all healthcare settings within LMICs. Studies published in English were included with no limit on publication date. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles of published studies. Data were analyzed quantitatively using frequencies and counts. Textual data from qualitative studies were analyzed using descriptive content analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-three publications were included, involving 20 LMICs. Studies were published between 2007 and 2023, with over 60% published in the past 7 years. Studies that evaluated familiarity/awareness of EBP showed that in general, nurses had low familiarity with or awareness of EBP. Most studies (60%) described nurses' attitudes toward EBP as positive, favorable, or high, and 31% as moderate. However, over 60% of studies described nurses' EBP knowledge/skills as moderate, low, or insufficient. Approximately 84% of studies described EBP implementation in healthcare settings as moderate, low, poor, or suboptimal. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Studies on nursing EBP have been increasing in LMICs for the past two decades, with findings highlighting opportunities for advancing EBP in nursing within LMICs. Health systems and healthcare organization leaders in LMICs should equip nurses with EBP knowledge and skills while providing the needed resources and support to ensure consistent implementation of EBP to improve health outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.321
GPT teacher head0.611
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorldviews on Evidence-Based NursingSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207