Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 投稿模板-刊鹿论文编译

Using Information Practices of Nurses to Reform Information Literacy Instruction in Baccalaureate Nursing Programs

Abstract:

Objective Seeking information is a key element of evidence based practice and successful healthcare delivery. Significant literature exists on both the information seeking behaviour of professional nurses and information literacy teaching methods, but scarce evidence connects nurses’ information behaviour and environments with their education. This study sought to use data from nursing alumni to answer the following research questions: What are the current information practices of professional bachelor’s-prepared nurses? How do recently-graduated nurses suggest that their education could have better prepared them to find and evaluate information in the workplace? Methods The researchers conducted a descriptive study using a 59-item survey instrument with a variety of question formats including short-answer, multiple choice, Likert, and open response. The researchers distributed the survey to baccalaureate nursing alumni who graduated in 20122017 from four universities in the state of Utah in the United States. Results Nurses seek practical information primarily to provide informed patient care, while also clarifying medical situations and expanding their health care knowledge. They frequently consult nursing colleagues and physicians when seeking information. The majority of nurses consult electronic health records daily. Respondents described time as the biggest barrier to accessing information. They requested authentic, clinically-focused scenarios, training on freelyaccessible resources, and more explicit teaching of lifelong learning skills, such as critical thinking. Conclusion Information literacy education should prepare student nurses for the fast-paced information environment they will face in the workplace. This means incorporating more patientfocused scenarios, freely available quality resources, and time-based activities in their education. The researchers suggest areas to prepare nurses for information seeking, including problembased clinical scenarios, building guides with databases accessible for free or little cost, and added emphasis on critical thinking and self-motivated learning.

Author Listing： Anne R. Diekema;Betsy S Hopkins;Brandon Patterson;Nena Schvaneveldt

Volume： 14

Pages： 72-102

DOI： 10.18438/eblip29588

Language： English

Journal： Evidence Based Library and Information Practice

Evidence Based Library and Information Practice

EVID BASED LIB INF P

影响因子：0.4

是否综述期刊：否

是否OA：是

是否预警：不在预警名单内

发行时间：-

ISSN：1715-720X

发刊频率：-

收录数据库：ESCI/Scopus收录/DOAJ开放期刊

出版国家/地区：Canada

出版社：University of Alberta

期刊介绍

年发文量	19
国人发稿量	-
国人发文占比	0%
自引率	0.0%
平均录取率	-
平均审稿周期	12 Weeks
版面费	-
偏重研究方向	INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
期刊官网	https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP
投稿链接	-

质量指标占比

研究类文章占比	OA被引用占比	撤稿占比	出版后修正文章占比
100.00%	100.00%	-	-

预警情况查看说明

时间	预警情况
2024年02月发布的2024版	不在预警名单中
2023年01月发布的2023版	不在预警名单中
2021年12月发布的2021版	不在预警名单中
2020年12月发布的2020版	不在预警名单中

JCR分区 WOS分区等级：Q4区

版本	按学科	分区
WOS期刊SCI分区 WOS期刊SCI分区是指SCI官方（Web of Science）为每个学科内的期刊按照IF数值排序，将期刊按照四等分的方法划分的Q1-Q4等级，Q1代表质量最高，即常说的1区期刊。（2021-2022年最新版）
	INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE	Q4

关于2019年中科院分区升级版（试行）

分区表升级版（试行）旨在解决期刊学科体系划分与学科发展以及融合趋势的不相容问题。由于学科交叉在当代科研活动的趋势愈发显著，学科体系构建容易引发争议。为了打破学科体系给期刊评价带来的桎梏，“升级版方案”首先构建了论文层级的主题体系，然后分别计算每篇论文在所属主题的影响力，最后汇总各期刊每篇论文分值，得到“期刊超越指数”，作为分区依据。

分区表升级版（试行）的优势：一是论文层级的主题体系既能体现学科交叉特点，又可以精准揭示期刊载文的多学科性；二是采用“期刊超越指数”替代影响因子指标，解决了影响因子数学性质缺陷对评价结果的干扰。整体而言，分区表升级版（试行）突破了期刊评价中学科体系构建、评价指标选择等瓶颈问题，能够更为全面地揭示学术期刊的影响力，为科研评价“去四唯”提供解决思路。相关研究成果经过国际同行的认可，已经发表在科学计量学领域国际重要期刊。

《2019年中国科学院文献情报中心期刊分区表升级版（试行）》首次将社会科学引文数据库（SSCI）期刊纳入到分区评估中。升级版分区表（试行）设置了包括自然科学和社会科学在内的18个大类学科。基础版和升级版（试行）将过渡共存三年时间，推测在此期间各大高校和科研院所仍可能会以基础版为考核参考标准。提示：中科院分区官方微信公众号“fenqubiao”仅提供基础版数据查询，暂无升级版数据，请注意区分。

中科院分区查看说明

版本	大类学科	小类学科	Top期刊	综述期刊
暂无数据