Cited by 101Education and Critical Thinking DevelopmentProblem and Project Based LearningInnovations in Medical Education

Practice and effectiveness of "nursing case-based learning" course on nursing student's critical thinking ability: A comparative study.

Li, Shasha, Ye, Xuchun, Chen, Wenting·2019·Nurse Education in Practice

Abstract

Background Case-based Learning was an effective and highly efficient teaching approach that was extensively applied in education systems across a variety of countries. Critical thinking ability is an important indicator for access the study ability for baccalaureate nursing education. Objectives The study aimed to explore the effect of "nursing case-based learning" course on the critical thinking ability of nursing student. Participants A total of 80 students who were in Junior were included in this study. The experimental group included 40 students who selected "nursing case-based learning" course. The control group included 40 students who selected the traditional teaching course. Methods The critical thinking disposition inventory (CTDI-CV) was used to evaluate the effects of the critical thinking abilities during the 1st week (pre-test), the 9th week (mid-test), and the 18th week (post-test). Results There are no statistically significant differences between two groups in the pre-test thinking abilities (P > 0.05). After nine weeks, the critical thinking abilities of experimental group were significantly higher than control group (P < 0.05). Three obtained time-points had statistically significant differences of control and experimental group (P < 0.05). Conclusion The "nursing case-based learning" was an effective course to develop the critical thinking abilities of nursing students. Strict instructional design was the guarantee for the smooth implementation of "nursing case-based learning" course.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nepr.2019.03.007

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Group case-based learning leads to greater improvements in critical thinking than individual case studies.

    “Research indicates that group case-based learning leads to greater improvements in critical thinking than individual case studies, as it encourages collaboration and diverse perspectives [82,83].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, S., Ye, X., & Chen, W.
Affiliations
  • Huzhou Normal University (CN)
  • Second Military Medical University (CN)
Corresponding author
Li, Shasha
Venue
Nurse Education in Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-03
Volume
36
Pages
91-96
ISSN
1471-5953 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2921024828
Cited by
101
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1
FWCI
24.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nurse Education in Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Teaching Reform of Higher Education (kg2015612)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
case-based learning, critical thinking, nursing students, baccalaureate nursing education, nursing curriculum, instructional design, Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory
MeSH terms
China, Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate, Humans, Nursing Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Nursing, Thinking, Problem-Based Learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review