Conectar
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are essential for evidence-based nursing care. However, the quality of reporting and adherence to methodological standards in Latin American nursing journals remains unclear. This study evaluates the characteristics, reporting quality, and potential risk of bias of RCTs published in Latin American nursing journals.
To assess the reporting compliance and risk of bias of RCTs published in Latin American nursing journals.
Meta-research study.
A comprehensive handsearch of 29 Latin American nursing journals was performed covering publications from 2000 to 2024. Identified RCTs were assessed for adherence to CONSORT reporting guidelines and evaluated for risk of bias. Outcomes were classified using the COMET taxonomy. A descriptive analysis was performed.
A total of 6377 references were screened, identifying 34 eligible RCTs, most published after 2018. The median CONSORT compliance was 19 reported items (IQR 16–22). High compliance (> 90%) was observed in abstract reporting items, study objectives, and participant selection criteria. However, critical methodological features such as randomization procedures, blinding, and protocol registration showed low adherence (< 40%). Risk of bias was mostly rated as having “some concerns”, largely due to insufficient reporting. According to the COMET taxonomy, the most frequently reported outcome domains were “Delivery of care” and “Physical functioning”.
Reporting compliance and risk of bias of RCTs published in Latin American nursing journals presents significant gaps, particularly in key methodological domains. These shortcomings hinder transparency, reproducibility, and integration into evidence synthesis. Strengthening editorial policies and enforcing reporting standards could enhance the quality and reliability of published research in Latin American nursing journals.
Smoking is the leading cause of preventable deaths. The training of professionals on brief tobacco interventions (BTIs) increases the effectiveness of these interventions.
To assess the effectiveness of an online training program on BTI based on the 5As and 5Rs model in acquiring anti-tobacco brief advice competencies among nurses.
Quasi-experimental study with a pre-test and post-test design, with a control group and without random assignment. In the experimental group (EG), online training was provided in three sections: BTI theoretical content and methodology, clinical scenario videos, and feedback. Each scenario assessed the 5As and 5Rs as a validated instrument (BTI-Prof(C)). The control group (CG) only assessed the three videos of clinical scenarios. In both groups, competence was measured at the following points in time: T0 (before the training), T1 (at the end of the training), and T2 (after 90 days). The efficacy of the intervention was measured through a two-way ANOVA, and the variation rate was calculated from T0 to T1 and from T0 to T2.
236 nurses participated (157 EG; 79 CG). The mean age was 42.9 years, and 76.7% were women. There was a significant group*time interaction in the three cases, indicating that the online BTI training increases the competence of these professionals in clinical scenario 1 (F = 10.210; p ≤ 0.001; η 2 = 0.081), clinical scenario 2 (F = 6.235; p = 0.002; η 2 = 0.051), and clinical scenario 3 (F = 11.271; p ≤ 0.001; η 2 = 0.090).
A brief, asynchronous, and online intervention using standardized video-based cases is effective in improving nurses' BTI competence. This type of training can be a useful option for the National Health System as part of a global and continuous strategy for nurses to perform BTI.
An asynchronous online training program provides nurses with standardized, evidence-based tools to implement brief tobacco interventions in routine care, offering a scalable and practical solution to strengthen preventive strategies in health systems.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of systematic reviews and other evidence synthesis. RCT identification remains challenging because of limitations in their indexation in major databases and potential language bias. Scientific production in Latin American nursing is steadily increasing, but little is known about its design or main features. We aimed to identify the extent of evidence from RCTs in nursing conducted by Latin American research teams and evaluate their main characteristics, including potential risk of bias.
Scoping review with risk of bias assessment.
We conducted a scoping review including a comprehensive electronic search in five relevant databases. We completed a descriptive data analysis and a risk of bias assessment of eligible studies using Cochrane's guidance.
We identified 1784 references of which 47 were RCTs published in 40 journals. Twenty (42.6%) RCTs were published in journals in English. Chronic diseases were the most common health conditions studied (29.7%). Fifteen (31.9%) RCTs had a high risk of bias. Thirty (75%) journals were included in the Journal Citation Report (JCR) catalog and 5 (16.7%) were journals classified under nursing category. Twenty-one (52.5%) journals explicitly required CONSORT checklist recommendations for RCTs reporting.
Publication of RCTs in nursing by Latin American authors has increased. Most journals where RCTs are published are in English and not specific to nursing. Searches in journals of other disciplines may be necessary to facilitate identification of RCTs in nursing. CONSORT statements need to be actively promoted to facilitate rigorous methodology and reporting of RCTs.
This study highlights the need for an increased research focus on RCTs in nursing in Latin America, and the importance of enhancing the reporting quality of these studies to support evidence-based nursing practice.
FreshRSS 