Pensamiento crítico en tutoras de práctica clínica

Q4 Nursing
inmaculada bonilla aguilar, Sergio Alonso Fernández, Llúcia Benito Aracil, esperanza Zuriguel Pérez, Maria Antonia Martínez Momblan
{"title":"Pensamiento crítico en tutoras de práctica clínica","authors":"inmaculada bonilla aguilar, Sergio Alonso Fernández, Llúcia Benito Aracil, esperanza Zuriguel Pérez, Maria Antonia Martínez Momblan","doi":"10.35667/metasenf.2022.25.1003082011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Critical thought in female clinical practice mentors Objective: to conceptualise the current situation regarding critical thought in female academic mentors and institutional mentors in the clinical practice setting, and to identify the most widely used instruments to measure their critical thought. Method: an integrative review where the PubMed and Scopus databases were consulted in the period between January 1998 and March 2022. The search was conducted using these controlled language terms: critical thinking; mentor; nurse educator; clinical practice; preceptor; Education; Nursing; and in articles published in Spanish, English and Portuguese. The article selection process was assisted by the Rayyan software and described with the PRISMA flow diagram. There was content analysis of the articles selected, in order to identify the emerging subjects. Results: the study included 72 original articles: 25 qualitative studies, three with mixed method, one Delphi study, 18 descriptive studies, six quasi-experimental studies, four randomized clinical trials, one analytical study, eight literature reviews, four correlational studies, and one systematic review. There were three emerging subjects: context factors of critical thought, promotion strategies, and instruments for critical thought evaluation. Conclusions: the Nursing profession has not yet adopted a standard evaluation for critical thought: this makes it difficult to compare results regarding the effect of certain interventions associated with critical thought development.","PeriodicalId":36801,"journal":{"name":"Metas de Enfermeria","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metas de Enfermeria","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35667/metasenf.2022.25.1003082011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Critical thought in female clinical practice mentors Objective: to conceptualise the current situation regarding critical thought in female academic mentors and institutional mentors in the clinical practice setting, and to identify the most widely used instruments to measure their critical thought. Method: an integrative review where the PubMed and Scopus databases were consulted in the period between January 1998 and March 2022. The search was conducted using these controlled language terms: critical thinking; mentor; nurse educator; clinical practice; preceptor; Education; Nursing; and in articles published in Spanish, English and Portuguese. The article selection process was assisted by the Rayyan software and described with the PRISMA flow diagram. There was content analysis of the articles selected, in order to identify the emerging subjects. Results: the study included 72 original articles: 25 qualitative studies, three with mixed method, one Delphi study, 18 descriptive studies, six quasi-experimental studies, four randomized clinical trials, one analytical study, eight literature reviews, four correlational studies, and one systematic review. There were three emerging subjects: context factors of critical thought, promotion strategies, and instruments for critical thought evaluation. Conclusions: the Nursing profession has not yet adopted a standard evaluation for critical thought: this makes it difficult to compare results regarding the effect of certain interventions associated with critical thought development.
临床实习导师的批判性思维
目的:对临床实践中女性学术导师和机构导师的批判性思维现状进行概念化,并确定最广泛使用的衡量其批判性思维的工具。方法:对1998年1月至2022年3月期间的PubMed和Scopus数据库进行综合评价。搜索是使用以下受控语言术语进行的:批判性思维;导师;护士教育工作者;临床实践;校长;教育;护理;并以西班牙语、英语和葡萄牙语发表文章。文章选择过程由Rayyan软件辅助,并使用PRISMA流程图进行描述。对所选文章进行了内容分析,以确定新兴主题。结果:纳入原创文献72篇,其中定性研究25篇,混合研究3篇,德尔菲研究1篇,描述性研究18篇,准实验性研究6篇,随机临床试验4篇,分析性研究1篇,文献综述8篇,相关研究4篇,系统综述1篇。新出现的课题有:批判性思维的语境因素、促进策略和批判性思维评价工具。结论:护理专业尚未采用批判性思维的标准评估:这使得比较与批判性思维发展相关的某些干预措施的效果的结果变得困难。
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
Metas de Enfermeria
Metas de Enfermeria Nursing-Nursing (all)
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信