Dataset Information

Curricula and learning objectives in nurse practitioner programmes: a scoping review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Globally, nurse practitioner (NP) has become an important nursing role in the pursuit of a more efficient healthcare, possessing the necessary expert skills to work as autonomous practitioners. Nevertheless, there are barriers in the implementation of this role. One barrier concerns the different levels of education required for NPs. Previous studies demonstrate the importance of acting for a uniform international education. The aim of the scoping review was to compile research about education to become an NP, focusing on the content of curricula and learning objectives.

Methods and analysis

The six-stage methodological framework by Arksey and O'Malley will guide the scoping review through the following stages: identifying the research questions; identifying relevant studies; study selection; charting the data; collating, summarising and reporting the results; and consultation. The research questions are as follows: What is the content of curricula in NP programmes? What are the learning objectives in NP programmes? The literature searches will be conducted between March and June 2019 in the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL and ERIC, followed by hand searching reference lists of key studies. Grey literature will be searched in Google Scholar, Libsearch, existing networks and relevant organisations. Two researchers will screen titles and abstracts. Included full-text articles will be screened by three researchers and assessed for their methodological quality by the use of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. The PreferredReporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram will be used to demonstrate included and excluded articles. The findings will be presented through a numerical summary of the included articles, followed by a thematic analysis.

Ethics and dissemination

Research ethics approval is not required for a scoping review. The scoping review will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. Additionally, the findings will be disseminated to stakeholders representing political, educational, professional and union organisations through a Delphi study as part of the consultation stage of the Arksey and O'Malleys framework.

SUBMITTER: Ljungbeck B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6661641 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Curricula and learning objectives in nurse practitioner programmes: a scoping review protocol.

Ljungbeck Birgitta B Forss Katarina Sjogren KS Finnbogadóttir Hafrún H Carlson Elisabeth E

BMJ open 20190724 7

<h4>Introduction</h4>Globally, nurse practitioner (NP) has become an important nursing role in the pursuit of a more efficient healthcare, possessing the necessary expert skills to work as autonomous practitioners. Nevertheless, there are barriers in the implementation of this role. One barrier concerns the different levels of education required for NPs. Previous studies demonstrate the importance of acting for a uniform international education. The aim of the scoping review was to compile resea ...[more]

PMID: 31345974

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPrimary healthcare nurse practitioners (PHCNPs) practice in a wide range of clinical settings and with diverse patient populations. Several systematic reviews have examined outcomes of PHCNP roles. However, there is a lack of consistency in the definitions used for the PHCNP role across the reviews. The identification of indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice from the perspective of patients, providers and the healthcare system will allow researchers, clinicians and decision-makers to understand how these providers contribute to outcomes of care.Methods and analysisA review of systematic reviews is proposed to describe the current state of knowledge about indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice using recognised role definitions. Outcomes of interest include any outcome indicator measuring the effectiveness of PHCNPs. We will limit our search to 2010 onwards to capture the most up-to-date trends. The following electronic databases will be searched: Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews and Controlled Trials Register, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, EMBASE, Global Health, Health Economics Evaluation Database, Health Evidence, HealthStar, Health Systems Evidence, Joanna Briggs Institute, Medline, PDQ-Evidence, PubMed and Web of Science. The search strategies will be reviewed by an academic librarian. Reference lists of all relevant publications will be reviewed. Grey literature will be searched from 2010 onwards, and will include: CADTH Information Services, CADTH's Grey Matters tool, OpenGrey, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses and WHO. The PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews will be searched to identify registered review protocols. The review protocol was developed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols recommendations. A narrative synthesis will be used to summarise study findings.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required for the study. The data used in the study will be abstracted from published systematic reviews. Dissemination strategies will include peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations and presentations to key stakeholders.Prospero registration numberCRD42020198182.

Project description:IntroductionIn formative peer assessment, the students give and receive feedback from each other and expand their knowledge in a social context of interaction and collaboration. The ability to collaborate and communicate are essential parts of the healthcare professionals' competence and delivery of safe patient care. Thereby, it is of utmost importance to support students with activities fostering these competences during their healthcare education. The aim of the scoping review is to compile research on peer assessment presented in healthcare education programmes, focusing formative assessment. The result of the scoping review will form the basis for developing and conducting an intervention focusing collaborative learning and peer assessment in a healthcare education programme.Methods and analysisThe scoping review will be conducted by using the framework presented by Arksey & O'Malley and Levac et al. The primary research question is: How are formative peer assessment interventions delivered in healthcare education? The literature search will be conducted in the peer-reviewed databases PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Education Research Complete and Education Research Centre between September and December 2018. Additional search will be performed in Google Scholar, hand-searching of reference lists of included studies and Libsearch for identification of grey literature. Two researchers will independently screen title and abstract. Full-text articles will be screened by three researchers using a charting form. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria will be critically evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. A flow diagram will present the included and excluded studies. A narrative synthesis will be conducted by using thematic analysis as presented by Braun and Clarke. The findings will be presented under thematic headings using a summary table. To enhance validity, stakeholders from healthcare education programmes and healthcare institutions will be provided with an overview of the preliminary results.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics approval is not required for the scoping review.

Project description:IntroductionMany hospitalised older adults experience delayed discharges due to increased postacute health and social support needs. Transitional care programmes (TCPs) provide short-term care to these patients to prepare them for transfer to nursing homes or back to the community with supports. There are knowledge gaps related to the development, implementation and evaluation of TCPs. The aims of this scoping review (ScR) are to identify the characteristics of older patients served by TCPs; criteria for transfer, components and services provided by TCPs; and outcomes used to evaluate TCPs.Methods and analysisThe study involves six-step ScR and is informed by a collaborative/participatory approach whereby stakeholders engage in the development of the research questions, identification of literature, data abstraction and synthesis; and participation in consultation workshop. The search for scientific literature will be done in the Medline, PsychINFO, Emcare and CINAHL databases; as well, policies and reports that examined models of transitional care and the outcomes used to evaluate them will be reviewed. Records will be selected if they involve community dwelling older adults aged 65 years or older, or indigenous persons 45 years or older; and presented in English, French, Dutch and German languages. Records will be screened, reviewed and abstracted by two independent reviewers. Extracted data will be analysed using descriptive statistics and a narrative analysis, and organised according to Donabedian's model of structure (characteristics of older adults experiencing delayed discharge and served by TCPs), process (TCP components and services) and outcome.Ethics and disseminationThis ScR does not require ethics approval. Dissemination activities include integrated knowledge translation (KT) (consultation with stakeholders throughout the study) and end-of-grant KT strategies (presentations at national and international conferences; and publication in peer-reviewed interdisciplinary journal).

Dataset Information

Curricula and learning objectives in nurse practitioner programmes: a scoping review protocol.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Publications

Curricula and learning objectives in nurse practitioner programmes: a scoping review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets