Conectar
Systematic reviews are considered the highest level of evidence that can help guide evidence-informed decisions in nursing practice, education, and even health policy. Systematic review publications have increased from a sporadic few in 1980s to more than 10,000 systematic reviews published every year and around 30,000 registered in prospective registries.
A cross-sectional design and a variety of data sources were triangulated to identify the journals from which systematic reviews would be evaluated for adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 reporting guidelines and scope. Specifically, this study used the PRISMA 2020 reporting guidelines to assess the reporting of the introduction, methods, information sources and search strategy, study selection process, quality/bias assessments, and results and discussion aspects of the included systematic reviews.
Upon review of the 215 systematic reviews published in 10 top-tier journals in the field of nursing in 2019 and 2020, this study identified several opportunities to improve the reporting of systematic reviews in the context of the 2020 PRISMA statement. Areas of priority for reporting include the following key areas: (1) information sources, (2) search strategies, (3) study selection process, (4) bias reporting, (5) explicit discussion of the implications to policy, and lastly, the need for (6) prospective protocol registration.
The use of the PRISMA 2020 guidelines by authors, peer reviewers, and editors can help to ensure the transparent and detailed reporting of systematic reviews published in the nursing literature.
Systematic reviews are considered strong research evidence that can guide evidence-based practice and even clinical decision-making. This paper addresses some common methodological and process issues among systematic reviews that can guide clinicians and practitioners to be more critical in appraising research evidence that can shape nursing practice.
To delineate between the concepts of parental presence, participation, and engagement in paediatric hospital care.
The concepts' uses in the literature were analysed to determine attributes, influences, and relationships.
Delineations of each concept are established and conceptual definitions are proposed following Morses' methods.
MEDLINE (PubMed); CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociology Source Ultimate (EBSCOhost); Embase, Scopus (Elsevier); Google Scholar. Search dates October 2021, February 2023.
Multinational publications dated 1991–2023 revealed these concepts represent a range of parental behaviours, beliefs, and actions, which are not always perceptible to nurses, but which are important in family-integrated care delivery. Parental presence is the state of a parent being physically and/or emotionally with their child. Parental participation reflects parents' performing caregiving activities with or without nurses. Parental engagement is a parents' state of emotional involvement in their child's health and the ways they act on their child's behalf.
These concepts' manifestations are important to parental role attainment but may be inadequately understood and considered by healthcare providers.
Nurses have influence over parents' parental presence, participation, and engagement in their child's care but need support from healthcare institutions to ensure equitable family-integrated care delivery.
Problem: Lack of clear definition among these concepts results in incomplete and at times inequitable family-integrated care delivery. Findings: Parental presence is an antecedent to parental participation, and parental presence and participation are elements of parental engagement. The concepts interact to influence one another. Impact: Hospitalized children, their families, nurses, and researchers will benefit through a better understanding of the concepts' attributes, interactions, and implications for enhanced family-integrated care delivery.
FreshRSS 