Evaluating Evidence-Based Practice and Quality Improvement Initiatives in the Nursing Literature Using a Critical Appraisal Tool

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Julee Briscoe Waldrop, Staci Reynolds, Jayne Jennings Dunlap
{"title":"Evaluating Evidence-Based Practice and Quality Improvement Initiatives in the Nursing Literature Using a Critical Appraisal Tool","authors":"Julee Briscoe Waldrop,&nbsp;Staci Reynolds,&nbsp;Jayne Jennings Dunlap","doi":"10.1111/jnu.70128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Reports of evidence-based practice (EBP) and quality improvement (QI) in nursing journals often vary in reporting quality, hindering translation into practice. A critical appraisal tool for evidence-based practice quality improvement (EBPQI) has recently been made available on the EQUATOR Network.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A descriptive cross-sectional study of full-length articles (Jan–Jun 2025) from 28 nursing journals that accept reports of EBP and/or QI (per submission guidelines); each article was scored by two authors using the open-access critical appraisal tool for EBPQI.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Collectively, these journals published 86 issues and 949 full-length articles; 30 (3.2%) articles were identified as EBP or QI reports and were published among 10 (33%) journals. Of these 30 articles, only 6 (20%) used appropriate EBP and/or QI methods and were therefore appraised using the EBPQI critical appraisal tool. Based on the EBPQI critical appraisal tool, the EBP and QI reports varied in how and to what extent they met EBPQI criteria.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Variation exists in journal guidance and reporting of EBP/QI initiatives. Consistent use of EBPQI criteria highlights the need for standardized reporting to improve transparency, transferability, and translation into practice.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Clinical Relevance</h3>\n \n <p>Transparent, standardized reporting of EBP and/or QI initiatives enables clinicians to appraise relevance and transferability to practice. Reporting aligned with recognized guidelines (or clear justification for deviations) is warranted.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51091,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nursing Scholarship","volume":"58 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jnu.70128","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nursing Scholarship","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jnu.70128","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Reports of evidence-based practice (EBP) and quality improvement (QI) in nursing journals often vary in reporting quality, hindering translation into practice. A critical appraisal tool for evidence-based practice quality improvement (EBPQI) has recently been made available on the EQUATOR Network.

Methods

A descriptive cross-sectional study of full-length articles (Jan–Jun 2025) from 28 nursing journals that accept reports of EBP and/or QI (per submission guidelines); each article was scored by two authors using the open-access critical appraisal tool for EBPQI.

Results

Collectively, these journals published 86 issues and 949 full-length articles; 30 (3.2%) articles were identified as EBP or QI reports and were published among 10 (33%) journals. Of these 30 articles, only 6 (20%) used appropriate EBP and/or QI methods and were therefore appraised using the EBPQI critical appraisal tool. Based on the EBPQI critical appraisal tool, the EBP and QI reports varied in how and to what extent they met EBPQI criteria.

Conclusion

Variation exists in journal guidance and reporting of EBP/QI initiatives. Consistent use of EBPQI criteria highlights the need for standardized reporting to improve transparency, transferability, and translation into practice.

Clinical Relevance

Transparent, standardized reporting of EBP and/or QI initiatives enables clinicians to appraise relevance and transferability to practice. Reporting aligned with recognized guidelines (or clear justification for deviations) is warranted.

使用关键评估工具评估护理文献中的循证实践和质量改进举措。
导读:护理期刊上关于循证实践(EBP)和质量改进(QI)的报告质量往往参差不齐,阻碍了转化为实践。最近在赤道网络上提供了一个关键的基于证据的实践质量改进评估工具。方法:对28种接受EBP和/或QI报告的护理期刊(按投稿指南)的全文(2025年1 - 6月)进行描述性横断面研究;每篇文章由两位作者使用EBPQI的开放获取关键评估工具进行评分。结果:这些期刊共发表86期论文949篇;30篇(3.2%)文章被确定为EBP或QI报告,发表在10种(33%)期刊上。在这30篇文章中,只有6篇(20%)使用了适当的EBP和/或QI方法,因此使用EBPQI关键评估工具进行了评估。基于EBPQI关键评估工具,EBP和QI报告在满足EBPQI标准的方式和程度上有所不同。结论:EBP/QI倡议的期刊指导和报告存在差异。EBPQI标准的持续使用强调了标准化报告的必要性,以提高透明度、可转移性和转化为实践。临床相关性:EBP和/或QI计划的透明、标准化报告使临床医生能够评估相关性和可转移性。报告应符合公认的指导方针(或对偏差的明确解释)。
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
6.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
85
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: This widely read and respected journal features peer-reviewed, thought-provoking articles representing research by some of the world’s leading nurse researchers. Reaching health professionals, faculty and students in 103 countries, the Journal of Nursing Scholarship is focused on health of people throughout the world. It is the official journal of Sigma Theta Tau International and it reflects the society’s dedication to providing the tools necessary to improve nursing care around the world.
×
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