Assessing numeracy and medication calculations within undergraduate nursing education: A qualitative study

计算能力 主题分析 能力(人力资源) 声誉 医学教育 护理部 护士教育 心理学 医学 定性研究 教育学 社会学 社会心理学 社会科学 读写能力
作者
Christine Minty‐Walker,Nathan J. Wilson,Leanne Rylands,Jim Pettigrew,Leanne Hunt
出处
期刊:Nursing open [Wiley]
卷期号:11 (7): e2226-e2226 被引量:4
标识
DOI:10.1002/nop2.2226
摘要

Abstract Aim To explore how undergraduate nursing students are assessed on nursing numeracy and medication calculations from the perspective of Australian nurse education leaders. Design A qualitative study. Methods Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 17 nurse education leaders between November 2022 and January 2023. Braun and Clarke's six phases of thematic analysis were used to analyse the data. Results Five key themes were identified: (i) high expectations to keep the public safe, (ii) diverse assessment formats, (iii) different ways of managing assessment integrity, (iv) assessment conditions incongruent to the clinical setting and (v) supporting struggling students. Conclusion Nurse education leaders set high standards requiring students to achieve 100% in numeracy and medication calculation assessments, thus maintaining the reputation of nursing and patient safety. However, students struggled to meet this expectation. Diverse assessment formats were implemented, with some examination conditions contrary to clinical practice. Currently, there is no benchmark or independent point of registration examination in Australia, hence the problem is each university had a different standard to judge students' competence. Gaining insight into how these assessments are conducted provides an opportunity to work towards an evidence‐based model or benchmark for the assessment of numeracy. Implications for the Profession Dosage errors in clinical practice threaten patient safety and the reputation of the nursing profession. The accuracy rate of calculations by undergraduate and registered nurses is deficient worldwide. This research highlights a major educational issue, that being the wide variation in how numeracy assessments are conducted with no clear pedagogical rationale for a standardised method. Such assessments would establish a national standard, contributing to quality assurance, the development of the nursing profession and improve patient safety.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
君莫问完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
1秒前
MMTI发布了新的文献求助30
2秒前
深情机器猫完成签到 ,获得积分10
2秒前
Eyrie2001完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
搜集达人应助程程采纳,获得10
3秒前
黎明发布了新的文献求助30
3秒前
科研通AI6.4应助杨主意采纳,获得10
3秒前
斯文败类应助yy采纳,获得10
4秒前
搞怪的芙完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
WAX应助俭朴琦采纳,获得10
5秒前
1bo1bo发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
5秒前
shangan完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
明理初丹应助走天涯采纳,获得10
7秒前
8秒前
cqqqq完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
Dr_Zhan发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
小二郎应助GENG采纳,获得10
10秒前
不管啦发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
星辰大海应助妩媚的觅珍采纳,获得10
13秒前
orixero应助律笺文采纳,获得10
15秒前
tuyfytjt发布了新的文献求助30
16秒前
Nole应助开心采纳,获得30
18秒前
科研通AI6.2应助jq_s_s采纳,获得10
18秒前
柯晓静发布了新的文献求助30
18秒前
19秒前
19秒前
不安平松发布了新的文献求助10
19秒前
爆米花应助江江江采纳,获得10
20秒前
华仔应助ximi采纳,获得30
20秒前
木子完成签到,获得积分20
21秒前
舒服的婷冉完成签到 ,获得积分10
21秒前
23秒前
木子发布了新的文献求助10
23秒前
24秒前
fofo发布了新的文献求助10
24秒前
李秋莉发布了新的文献求助10
24秒前
张嘉伟发布了新的文献求助10
24秒前
爆米花应助WSR采纳,获得10
24秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
HYDROLYSE ACIDE DE QUELQUES DIOXASPIROCYCLANES 1314
Navigating Normative Orders. Interdisciplinary Perspectives 800
Essentials of Carbohydrate Chemistry and Biochemistry, 4th Edition 700
1 Peter and Christ's Descent to the Dead in Its Early Christian Reception 700
Organizational Behavior 510
Management and the Arts 510
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 内科学 物理 复合材料 催化作用 细胞生物学 无机化学 光电子学 物理化学 电极 基因
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 7743639
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 9291713
关于积分的说明 20209334
捐赠科研通 7322319
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3307445
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2459270
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2318170