Instruments evaluating the quality of the clinical learning environment in nursing education: An updated systematic review

Abstract

ObjectivesThe clinical learning environment offers meaningful learning opportunities for nursing students to apply theoretical knowledge to practice on actual or simulated patients. A previous systematic review assessed the quality of several instruments that evaluated the quality of clinical learning environments. This updated systematic review aimed to identify: any additional instruments that have been researched in the last 5 years, ii) the psychometric properties of available instruments and iii) the estimated comparable psychometric properties of the available instruments. Data sourcesMedline, CINAHL and Cochrane databases Review methodsDatabases were searched from January 2016 to January 2023. Studies were included if they: a) validated instruments evaluating the experience and quality of clinical learning environments; b) assessed the pre-licensure nursing student experience; c) were published in English; and d) were published after April 2016. Two independent reviewers conducted title and abstract screening, full text screening, data extraction and methodological quality assessment. Any disagreements were resolved by consensus. A summary of the findings was tabulated using the same format as the initial review. ResultsAn additional 18 studies were found, which used seven different clinical learning environment evaluation instruments. Internal consistency and structural validity were the most frequently reported psychometric properties. In almost all studies, methodology for these properties were of sufficient quality according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) tool evaluation. Other properties were inconsistently reported, with differing qualities in the methodology. Clinical Learning Environment, Supervision and Nurse Teacher (CLES + T) remains the most translated and validated instrument across several countries. ConclusionsInstruments developed and validated using a systematic, transparent and high-quality methodology assist in accurately assessing the skills, attitudes and decision-making abilities of the preregistration level nursing student. These tools can be used in clinical placement accreditation and quality improvement of nursing education. The methodology for evaluation of the psychometric properties of instruments should be clearly described.