解决护理教育中的不诚实：干预效果的系统回顾

IF 3.3 3区医学 Q1 NURSING

Nurse Education in Practice Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104327

Nikol Bekman , Efrat Danino , Elena Maoz

{"title":"解决护理教育中的不诚实：干预效果的系统回顾","authors":"Nikol Bekman , Efrat Danino , Elena Maoz","doi":"10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of educational interventions to reduce academic and clinical dishonesty among nursing students. It examines these interventions' objectives, content, instructional methods, duration and assessment outcomes to identify gaps and opportunities for fostering ethical behavior.</div></div><div><h3>Background</h3><div>Academic and clinical dishonesty among nursing students threatens professional integrity and patient safety but remains under-researched, especially in clinical settings.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in EMBASE, EBSCO, PROQUEST, PubMed and Scopus for peer- review studies published between 2010 and 2024. Three researchers independently performed the selection and data extraction process. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Public Health Effectiveness Project tool, which was adapted for interventional studies. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO [Registration Number CRD42024595490].</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Only four studies met the inclusion criteria, originating from the USA, Iran and Australia. All educational interventions focused exclusively on academic dishonesty, with an emphasis on plagiarism. The educational content ranged from theoretical understanding to practical skills, such as citation and paraphrasing. However, none of the interventions addressed clinical dishonesty, highlighting a critical gap in nursing education. The effectiveness of these educational interventions was predominantly assessed through self-reported improvements in knowledge and attitudes.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The systematic review highlights significant gaps in educational interventions for preventing dishonesty among nursing students. The focus on plagiarism, without addressing clinical dishonesty, underscores the need for comprehensive curricula. A systematic approach integrating academic and clinical dishonesty is vital to strengthen professional identity and ethical standards.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48715,"journal":{"name":"Nurse Education in Practice","volume":"84 ","pages":"Article 104327"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Addressing dishonesty in nursing education: A systematic review of intervention effectiveness\",\"authors\":\"Nikol Bekman , Efrat Danino , Elena Maoz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104327\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of educational interventions to reduce academic and clinical dishonesty among nursing students. It examines these interventions' objectives, content, instructional methods, duration and assessment outcomes to identify gaps and opportunities for fostering ethical behavior.</div></div><div><h3>Background</h3><div>Academic and clinical dishonesty among nursing students threatens professional integrity and patient safety but remains under-researched, especially in clinical settings.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in EMBASE, EBSCO, PROQUEST, PubMed and Scopus for peer- review studies published between 2010 and 2024. Three researchers independently performed the selection and data extraction process. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Public Health Effectiveness Project tool, which was adapted for interventional studies. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO [Registration Number CRD42024595490].</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Only four studies met the inclusion criteria, originating from the USA, Iran and Australia. All educational interventions focused exclusively on academic dishonesty, with an emphasis on plagiarism. The educational content ranged from theoretical understanding to practical skills, such as citation and paraphrasing. However, none of the interventions addressed clinical dishonesty, highlighting a critical gap in nursing education. The effectiveness of these educational interventions was predominantly assessed through self-reported improvements in knowledge and attitudes.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The systematic review highlights significant gaps in educational interventions for preventing dishonesty among nursing students. The focus on plagiarism, without addressing clinical dishonesty, underscores the need for comprehensive curricula. A systematic approach integrating academic and clinical dishonesty is vital to strengthen professional identity and ethical standards.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48715,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nurse Education in Practice\",\"volume\":\"84 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104327\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"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/S1471595325000836\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nurse Education in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471595325000836","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

摘要

目的评价教育干预对减少护生学术和临床不诚实行为的效果。它检查了这些干预措施的目标、内容、教学方法、持续时间和评估结果，以确定促进道德行为的差距和机会。护理专业学生的学术和临床不诚实行为威胁着专业操守和患者安全，但研究仍然不足，特别是在临床环境中。方法按照PRISMA指南，在EMBASE、EBSCO、PROQUEST、PubMed和Scopus中系统检索2010年至2024年间发表的同行评议研究。三位研究人员独立进行了选择和数据提取过程。使用公共卫生有效性项目工具评估研究的质量，该工具适用于干预性研究。研究方案已在PROSPERO中注册[注册号CRD42024595490]。结果仅有4项研究符合纳入标准，分别来自美国、伊朗和澳大利亚。所有的教育干预都集中在学术不诚实上，重点是抄袭。教育内容从理论理解到实践技能，如引用和释义。然而，没有任何干预措施解决临床不诚实，突出了护理教育的关键差距。这些教育干预措施的有效性主要通过自我报告的知识和态度的改善来评估。结论系统回顾表明，在预防护生不诚实行为的教育干预方面存在显著差距。对剽窃的关注，而没有解决临床不诚实的问题，强调了全面课程的必要性。整合学术和临床不诚信的系统方法对于加强职业认同和道德标准至关重要。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Addressing dishonesty in nursing education: A systematic review of intervention effectiveness

Aim

This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of educational interventions to reduce academic and clinical dishonesty among nursing students. It examines these interventions' objectives, content, instructional methods, duration and assessment outcomes to identify gaps and opportunities for fostering ethical behavior.

Background

Academic and clinical dishonesty among nursing students threatens professional integrity and patient safety but remains under-researched, especially in clinical settings.

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in EMBASE, EBSCO, PROQUEST, PubMed and Scopus for peer- review studies published between 2010 and 2024. Three researchers independently performed the selection and data extraction process. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Public Health Effectiveness Project tool, which was adapted for interventional studies. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO [Registration Number CRD42024595490].

Results

Only four studies met the inclusion criteria, originating from the USA, Iran and Australia. All educational interventions focused exclusively on academic dishonesty, with an emphasis on plagiarism. The educational content ranged from theoretical understanding to practical skills, such as citation and paraphrasing. However, none of the interventions addressed clinical dishonesty, highlighting a critical gap in nursing education. The effectiveness of these educational interventions was predominantly assessed through self-reported improvements in knowledge and attitudes.

Conclusions

The systematic review highlights significant gaps in educational interventions for preventing dishonesty among nursing students. The focus on plagiarism, without addressing clinical dishonesty, underscores the need for comprehensive curricula. A systematic approach integrating academic and clinical dishonesty is vital to strengthen professional identity and ethical standards.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Nurse Education in Practice NURSING-

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.