Introduction
Published in the Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, this journal article is titled “Educational Intervention to Improve Critical Thinking for Undergraduate Nursing Students: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” The primary focus of this journal article is the effectiveness of educational interventions in enhancing the critical thinking skills of undergraduate nursing students. To evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention, the authors conducted a randomized clinical trial and measured outcomes using both quantitative and qualitative metrics. This article is significant because it provides valuable insights into how educational interventions can support the development of critical reasoning skills in nursing undergraduates.
Critical Analysis
This article explores how PBL and the ALMCT can develop critical thinking (CT) among nursing students as part of an essential life support educational intervention (BLS). The article offers a thorough overview of the study methodology, results, and discussion thanks to its straightforward and succinct organization. The study involved 108 Brazilian undergraduate nursing students who took a BLS course and was a two-arm, single-blinded, parallel clinical trial (Carbogim et al., 2018). PBL was used in the experimental group (EG), while PBL + ALMCT was used in the control group (CG).
The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) were used as pre-and post-tests to assess CT dispositions and skills. Because it offers a thorough and insightful analysis of the research topic, the article effectively conveys knowledge and provides readers with a comprehensive understanding of the study. The effectiveness of PBL and the ALMCT in developing nursing students’ critical thinking capabilities is thoroughly examined in this article, which I highly recommend reading.
The study’s findings are thoroughly discussed in depth in the article. The total CCTDI and CCTST scales, as well as the majority of their subscales, did not show any statistically significant differences between the CG and EG groups (Carbogim et al., 2018). When the mean scores on the pre- and post-tests were compared for the CCTDI analyticity subscale (t = 2073; p = 0.043) and the CCTST analysis subscale (t = 2302; p = 0.025), a significant difference was found in the EG.
Implications of the Article
The study also has implications for nursing education. The results suggest that PBL and ALMCT can be combined to enhance CT in nursing students within a short timeframe. As a result, nursing educators can include this intervention in their curricula, which is advantageous. Furthermore, combining PBL and ALMCT may offer students a fun and valuable way to learn and practice critical thinking skills.
Future studies in the field could be affected by the study’s findings. Future research should focus on specific areas, according to the researchers, to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how PBL combined with ALMCT impacts CT in nursing students. These research areas include longer-term randomized clinical trials and studies combining PBL and ALMCT.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The article has several advantages. The participants were randomly assigned to either the control or experimental groups. The researchers still needed to determine which participants were in which group because the study was randomized and single-blinded, which aided in minimizing bias in the study’s findings. They also used pre- and post-tests to gauge the critical thinking capabilities and dispositions of the participants, enabling them to assess how the intervention affected their critical thinking abilities.
Additionally, the study has some things that could be improved. First, the study was conducted for only one month, an extremely brief timeframe, which may limit the extent of the participants’ critical thinking competence development, as observed by the researchers. Furthermore, the results may not be representative of the population due to the small sample size. Finally, the results showed that for the majority of the subscales of the CCTDI and the CCTST, there were no significant differences between the control and experimental groups (CCTST).
Conclusion
The results of this study indicate that PBL and ALMCT work well together to promote critical thinking abilities in nursing students, suggesting that more than PBL is needed to enhance critical thinking abilities and dispositions when combined with ALMCT. The authors suggest that further research combining PBL and ALMCT may be necessary to determine its efficacy. The authors also recommend using extended randomized clinical trials in future research to better understand the long-term effects of PBL and PBL + ALMCT on CT abilities and dispositions.
After reading and analyzing this article, I learned how to apply PBL and the ALMCT to help nursing students foster critical thinking skills and attitudes. I recognize the importance of conducting randomized clinical trials over an extended period to understand the lasting impact of PBL and PBL with ALMCT. The value of using the CCTDI and the CCTST to assess CT abilities and dispositions has also become clear to me (CCTST). This study’s findings demonstrate that PBL combined with ALMCT enhances critical thinking in nursing students, and that further research utilizing PBL combined with ALMCT may be necessary to establish its efficacy.
Reference
Carbogim, F. da C., Barbosa, A. C. S., de Oliviera, L. B., de Sá Diaz, F. B. B., Toledo, L. V., Alves, K. R., Friedrich, D. B. de C., Luiz, F. S., & Püschel, V. A. de A. (2018). Educational intervention to improve critical thinking for undergraduate nursing students: A randomized clinical trial. Nurse Education in Practice, 33, 121–126. Web.