Organizational evidence‐based practice culture, implementation leadership, and nurses: A bidirectional mediation model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This study aimed to explore 1) factors that influenced the evidence-based practice competencies and behaviors of clinical nurses and 2) the interaction between the organizational evidence-based practice culture, head nurses' implementation leadership, and nurses' evidence-based practice competencies and behaviors. BACKGROUND: The significance of organizational evidence-based practice culture and head nurses' implementation leadership in enhancing nurses' evidence-based practice competencies and behavior is widely recognized in healthcare settings. However, there is limited knowledge of how these factors influence nurses' evidence-based practice competencies and behavior. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at 10 hospitals in China. Data were collected via online questionnaires from October to December 2020, utilizing social characteristic questionnaires, the Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire, the Organizational Culture and Readiness Scale for System-wide Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice, and the Implementation Leadership Scale. All data were imported into the IBM Statistical Program for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 27.0 and PROCESS version 4.1 macro on SPSS for statistical analysis. The design and reporting of our study adhered to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Checklist. RESULTS: We received 1047 (99.15%) valid questionnaires. The multiple linear regression analysis showed that significant factors were organizational evidence-based practice culture, implementation leadership, and years of experience in nursing. After controlling for the impact of the covariate (years of experience in nursing), it was found that organizational evidence-based practice culture partially mediated the relationship between head nurses' implementation leadership and nurses' evidence-based practice competencies and behaviors. Additionally, head nurses' implementation leadership partially mediated the relationship between organizational evidence-based practice culture and nurses' evidence-based practice competencies and behaviors. CONCLUSION: Organizational evidence-based practice culture, head nurses' implementation leadership, and years of experience in nursing significantly predict nurses' evidence-based practice competencies and behaviors. Organizational evidence-based practice culture and head nurses' implementation leadership mutually mediated their influence on nurses' implementation of evidence-based practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING AND POLICY: Head nurses should proactively seek opportunities to enhance their implementation leadership, such as participating in training programs (e.g., mentoring and coaching programs) and attending conferences, workshops, or seminars on implementation leadership. Policymakers should also consider providing more policy support for implementing leadership development and cultivating a positive evidence-based practice culture.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".