Maintenance of CPR skills among nursing students trained using Resuscitation Quality Improvement® program.

Background: The Resuscitation Quality Improvement® (RQI) program is a competency-based approach that provides low dose, high frequency cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skills training. Limited research has evaluated its effectiveness with nursing students who need to be prepared to respond to cardiopulmonary emergencies despite their student status and to be competent in CPR as they transition into practice. Objective: The objective of this multisite longitudinal study was to examine the maintenance of adult and infant compressions and ventilation skills by nursing students at 3 and 6 months following practice with real-time feedback using the RQI® program. Methods: The effectiveness of brief practice of CPR skills at the RQI® simulation station on the maintenance of skills was analyzed with 238 nursing students from six universities across the United States. Participants completed three practice sessions, at baseline (month 0), 3 months, and 6 months. At baseline, they performed compressions and ventilation with a bag-valve mask on adult and infant manikins without feedback (pretest), followed immediately by a session integrating real-time, objective feedback (both audio and visual) on their performance. CPR practice on the manikins with feedback on performance was then repeated every 3 months. Results: Practicing CPR skills at the RQI® simulation station every 3 months with real-time feedback enabled participants to maintain their compression and ventilation skills and improve them from baseline (month 0) to 6 months. There was no loss of skills among these participants. Median scores on the first attempt to compress and ventilate stayed above the minimum 75 % overall score that learners must achieve to be considered an adequate performance. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that brief practice of CPR skills at the RQI® simulation station every 3 months with real-time feedback was highly effective for maintaining students' competence in compressions and ventilation. Once the RQI® program is set up in a school, students could practice on their own as needed to maintain their skills.

Bibliometric analysis of nursing education reviews.

BACKGROUND: While the number of reviews of nursing education research has increased over the years, bibliometric studies about these reviews are limited. OBJECTIVES: The purposes were to: (1) examine the number of reviews of nursing education research published from 2018 through 2022, (2) identify journals publishing these reviews, (3) identify the types and topics of reviews in nursing education, and (4) analyze how these reviews are labeled (standard versus nonstandard). DESIGN: This was a bibliometric study of reviews in nursing education. METHODS: The search for reviews in nursing education was done using CINAHL Complete via the EBSCO host platform and was limited to articles published in peer reviewed journals. The results were imported into EndNote, and the title or abstract was used to identify the review type. The categorized reviews were then exported into Microsoft Excel. The titles and abstracts were searched to identify reviews in nursing education, resulting in 600 articles analyzed in this study. The topics of the reviews were identified via natural language processing techniques based on the Medical Subject Headings biomedical vocabulary in the manual tags with each article. RESULTS: The number of reviews has steadily increased over the years. The top journal in which reviews were published was Nurse Education Today (n = 197). Nearly a quarter (n = 149, 24.8 %) of the reviews were integrative, followed by systematic (n = 117, 19.5 %), scoping (n = 117, 19.5 %), and literature (n = 85, 14.2 %). There were 12 main topics: most reviews were on simulation, followed by critical thinking methods and the academic achievement of nursing students. CONCLUSION: This study documented an increase in the number of reviews of nursing education research over the last five years. The most common type was an integrative review, followed by systematic, scoping, and literature. Reviews on simulation were most common.

Diagnosis Unreliability of ChatGPT for Journal Evaluation.

Purpose: Academic and other researchers have limited tools with which to address the current proliferation of predatory and hijacked journals. These journals can have negative effects on science, research funding, and the dissemination of information. As most predatory and hijacked journals are not error free, this study used ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) technology tool, to conduct an evaluation of journal quality. Methods: Predatory and hijacked journals were analyzed for reliability using ChatGPT, and the reliability of result have been discussed. Results: It shows that ChatGPT is an unreliable tool for journal quality evaluation for both hijacked and predatory journals. Conclusion: To show how to address this gap, an early trial version of Journal Checker Chatbot has been developed and is discussed as an alternative chatbot that can assist researchers in detecting hijacked journals.

Developing competency of nursing students in cardiopulmonary resuscitation using Resuscitation Quality Improvement technology.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the outcomes of training nursing students in CPR skills using the Resuscitation Quality Improvement (RQI) program. METHODS: Nursing students (n=2,193) in 12 schools across the United States participated in this study. Students performed compressions and bag-masked ventilation on adult and infant manikins using the RQI simulation station without and then with feedback on their performance. RESULTS: With real-time, objective feedback from the RQI simulation station, students' performance of CPR skills improved, and they retained their skills over time. CONCLUSIONS: The RQI program and methodology of feedback is effective for training nursing students to be competent in CPR skills, essential for safe patient care. Nursing and other healthcare professions programs should consider adopting the RQI program for students to develop competency in CPR.

An examination of retracted articles in nursing literature.

INTRODUCTION: The output of scholarly publications in scientific literature has increased exponentially in recent years. This increase in literature has been accompanied by an increase in retractions. Although some of these may be attributed to publishing errors, many are the result of unsavory research practices. The purposes of this study were to identify the number of retracted articles in nursing and reasons for the retractions, analyze the retraction notices, and determine the length of time for an article in nursing to be retracted. DESIGN: This was an exploratory study. METHODS: A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Retraction Watch databases was conducted to identify retracted articles in nursing and their retraction notices. RESULTS: Between 1997 and 2022, 123 articles published in the nursing literature were retracted. Ten different reasons for retraction were used to categorize these articles with one-third of the retractions (n = 37, 30.1%) not specifying a reason. Sixty-eight percent (n = 77) were retracted because of an actual or a potential ethical concern: duplicate publication, data issues, plagiarism, authorship issues, and copyright. CONCLUSION: Nurses rely on nursing-specific scholarly literature as evidence for clinical decisions. The findings demonstrated that retractions are increasing within published nursing literature. In addition, it was evident that retraction notices do not prevent previously published work from being cited. This study addressed a gap in knowledge about article retractions specific to nursing.

Detection of fake papers in the era of artificial intelligence.

OBJECTIVES: Paper mills, companies that write scientific papers and gain acceptance for them, then sell authorships of these papers, present a key challenge in medicine and other healthcare fields. This challenge is becoming more acute with artificial intelligence (AI), where AI writes the manuscripts and then the paper mills sell the authorships of these papers. The aim of the current research is to provide a method for detecting fake papers. METHODS: The method reported in this article uses a machine learning approach to create decision trees to identify fake papers. The data were collected from Web of Science and multiple journals in various fields. RESULTS: The article presents a method to identify fake papers based on the results of decision trees. Use of this method in a case study indicated its effectiveness in identifying a fake paper. CONCLUSIONS: This method to identify fake papers is applicable for authors, editors, and publishers across fields to investigate a single paper or to conduct an analysis of a group of manuscripts. Clinicians and others can use this method to evaluate articles they find in a search to ensure they are not fake articles and instead report actual research that was peer reviewed prior to publication in a journal.

Screening for the social determinants of health: Referring patients to community-based services.

BACKGROUND: Screening patients for the social determinants of health (SDOH) allows clinicians to identify those needs and tailor referral efforts. Due to constraints on clinic time and monetary resources, a simple screening tool incorporated into existing clinic workflow increases its usefulness and impact. LOCAL PROBLEM: Our free, nurse-led, mobile health clinic (MHC) needed an enhanced process or tool for screening patients for SDOH. The purpose of this quality-improvement project was to screen adult patients in the MHC for SDOH needs and to increase volunteer staff perceptions of their knowledge and confidence in referring patients to relevant community-based services. METHODS: A screening process and tool was developed using guidelines from the Health Leads to identify patients' SDOH needs and related requests for assistance. The tool was introduced to and tested among volunteer staff through pretest/posttest surveys. INTERVENTIONS: Patients who visited the clinic were screened for the SDOH within the project period, and volunteer staff were surveyed about their perceptions of the screening tool. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients were screened for SDOH needs. Twenty-three percent reported food insecurity, 27% housing insecurity, 14% difficulty obtaining utilities, and 17% difficulty obtaining transportation; 28% requested assistance with their reported SDOH needs. Seventeen percent of patients reported two or more SDOH needs. At posttest, 100% of volunteer staff ( N = 9) indicated satisfaction with the SDOH screening questions, reported feeling knowledgeable about resources to use for patient referrals, and were confident in referring patients to needed resources. CONCLUSION: The screening tool aptly guided practice and was evaluated as "easy to use" for clinic patients and volunteer staff.