The effectiveness of peer learning interventions in nursing students’ clinical practice: A systematic review

IF 4.5 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Nurse Education in Practice Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-26 DOI:10.1016/j.nepr.2026.104781
Sara Palander , Toni Haapa , Jonna Juntunen , Siriwan Lim , Wentao Zhou , Marco Tomietto , Kristina Mikkonen
{"title":"The effectiveness of peer learning interventions in nursing students’ clinical practice: A systematic review","authors":"Sara Palander ,&nbsp;Toni Haapa ,&nbsp;Jonna Juntunen ,&nbsp;Siriwan Lim ,&nbsp;Wentao Zhou ,&nbsp;Marco Tomietto ,&nbsp;Kristina Mikkonen","doi":"10.1016/j.nepr.2026.104781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To describe the types of peer learning interventions used in nursing students’ clinical practice and evaluate their effectiveness compared with traditional approaches.</div></div><div><h3>Background</h3><div>Peer learning is increasingly used in clinical practice, yet evidence of its effectiveness remains limited, making evaluation essential for supporting student learning.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Systematic review conducted according to JBI and PRISMA guidelines.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, ProQuest (Education Collection) and Web of Science were searched up to January 2024. Eligibility criteria were defined using the PICO framework. Two reviewers independently screened and selected studies, with a third resolving disagreements. Methodological quality was appraised using the JBI Critical Appraisal Tools for randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs. Data were synthesised without meta-analysis and reported in accordance with PRISMA-SWiM.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twelve studies met the eligibility criteria, comprising five randomised controlled trials and seven quasi-experimental studies. Methodological quality varied. Interventions were implemented across diverse clinical settings and lasted 3–12 weeks. Overall, peer learning was more effective than traditional approaches in supporting nursing students’ professional development and psychological aspects of learning, particularly self-efficacy, although effect sizes for self-efficacy were small.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Peer learning in clinical practice appears to be more effective than traditional approaches in promoting nursing students’ professional development and supporting psychological aspects of learning. The small effects on self-efficacy highlight the need for further research examining psychological aspects of learning in greater depth. These findings can support educators and healthcare organisations in selecting clinical practice models that promote student learning.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48715,"journal":{"name":"Nurse Education in Practice","volume":"92 ","pages":"Article 104781"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nurse Education in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471595326000831","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

To describe the types of peer learning interventions used in nursing students’ clinical practice and evaluate their effectiveness compared with traditional approaches.

Background

Peer learning is increasingly used in clinical practice, yet evidence of its effectiveness remains limited, making evaluation essential for supporting student learning.

Design

Systematic review conducted according to JBI and PRISMA guidelines.

Methods

CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, ProQuest (Education Collection) and Web of Science were searched up to January 2024. Eligibility criteria were defined using the PICO framework. Two reviewers independently screened and selected studies, with a third resolving disagreements. Methodological quality was appraised using the JBI Critical Appraisal Tools for randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs. Data were synthesised without meta-analysis and reported in accordance with PRISMA-SWiM.

Results

Twelve studies met the eligibility criteria, comprising five randomised controlled trials and seven quasi-experimental studies. Methodological quality varied. Interventions were implemented across diverse clinical settings and lasted 3–12 weeks. Overall, peer learning was more effective than traditional approaches in supporting nursing students’ professional development and psychological aspects of learning, particularly self-efficacy, although effect sizes for self-efficacy were small.

Conclusions

Peer learning in clinical practice appears to be more effective than traditional approaches in promoting nursing students’ professional development and supporting psychological aspects of learning. The small effects on self-efficacy highlight the need for further research examining psychological aspects of learning in greater depth. These findings can support educators and healthcare organisations in selecting clinical practice models that promote student learning.
护生临床实践中同伴学习干预的有效性:系统回顾。
目的:描述护生临床实践中同伴学习干预的类型,并比较其与传统方法的效果。背景:同伴学习越来越多地应用于临床实践,但其有效性的证据仍然有限,这使得评估对支持学生学习至关重要。设计:根据JBI和PRISMA指南进行系统评价。方法:检索截止到2024年1月的CINAHL、Ovid MEDLINE、Scopus、ProQuest (Education Collection)和Web of Science。使用PICO框架定义资格标准。两位审稿人独立筛选和选择研究,第三位审稿人解决分歧。使用JBI随机对照试验和准实验设计的关键评价工具对方法学质量进行评价。数据未经荟萃分析进行合成,并按照PRISMA-SWiM进行报告。结果:12项研究符合入选标准,包括5项随机对照试验和7项准实验研究。方法质量各不相同。干预措施在不同的临床环境中实施,持续3-12周。总体而言,同伴学习比传统方法更有效地支持护理学生的专业发展和心理方面的学习,特别是自我效能感,尽管自我效能感的效应量很小。结论:临床实践中的同伴学习在促进护理学生专业发展和支持心理学习方面比传统方法更有效。对自我效能感的微小影响强调了进一步研究学习心理方面的必要性。这些发现可以支持教育工作者和医疗机构选择促进学生学习的临床实践模式。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
9.40%
发文量
180
审稿时长
51 days
期刊介绍: Nurse Education in Practice enables lecturers and practitioners to both share and disseminate evidence that demonstrates the actual practice of education as it is experienced in the realities of their respective work environments. It is supportive of new authors and will be at the forefront in publishing individual and collaborative papers that demonstrate the link between education and practice.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书