Computer-based instruction for improving student nurses' general numeracy: Is it effective? Two randomised trials

Educational Studies

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 151-163

  Ainsworth, Hannah ^a   Gilchrist, Mollie ^b   Grant, Celia ^a   Hewitt, Catherine ^a   Ford, Sue ^a   Petrie, Moira ^b   Torgerson, Carole J ^c   Torgerson, David J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b Faculty of Engineering and Computing   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Authentic World ; numeracy; RCT; student nurses

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859506112     PISSN: 03055698     EISSN: 14653400     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03055698.2011.598668     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Ainsworth, H.R., Torgerson, D.J. and Kang'ombe, A. 2010. Conceptual, design, and statistical complications associated with participant preference. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 628: 176-88.
2. Altman, D.G., Schulz, K.F.Moher, D. 2001. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine, 134(8): 663-39.
3. Authentic World® website. 2008. http://www.authenticworld.co.uk/products.php (accessed January 15, 2008).
4. Bindler, R. and Bayne, T. 1984. Do baccalaureate students possess basic mathematics proficiency?. Journal of Nurse Education, 23(5): 192-7.
5. Boutron, I., Moher, D., Altman, D.G., Schulz, K.F., Ravaud, P. and CONSORT Group. 2008. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine, 148: 295-309.
6. Department of Health. 2000. An organisation with a memory: Report of an expert group on learning from adverse events in the NHS, London: The Stationery Office.
7. Department of Health. 2004. Building a safer NHS for patients: Improving medication safety, London: Department of Health, NHS, Crown Copyright.
8. Guilkers, J., Bastiaens, T. and Kirschner, P. 2006. Authentic assessment, student and teacher perceptions: The practical value of the five-dimensional framework. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 58(3): 337-57.
9. Healthcare Numeracy Working Group. 2006. Identifying and supporting the numeracy needs of healthcare staff in Scotland, Edinburgh: NHS Education for Scotland.
10. Hewitt, C.E., Torgerson, D.J. and Miles, J.N.V. 2006. Is there another way to take account of noncompliance in randomized controlled trials?. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 175(4): 347-8.
11. Hilton, D.F. 1999. Considering academic qualification in mathematics as an entry requirement for a diploma in nursing. Nurse Education Today, 19: 543-7.
12. Hutton, B.M. 1998a. Do school qualifications predict competence in nursing calculations?. Nurse Education Today, 18: 25-31.
13. Hutton, B.M. 1998b. Nursing mathematics: The importance of application. Nursing Standard, 13(11): 35-8.
14. Jukes, L. and Gilchrist, M. 2005. Concerns about numeracy skills of nursing students. Nurse Education in Practice, 6: 192-8.
15. Nursing and Midwifery Council. 2004. Standards of proficiency for pre-registration nursing education. London: Nursing and Midwifery Council.
16. Sabin, M. 2002. Occasional paper no. 3 competence in practice-based calculation: Issues for nursing education, London: Learning and Teaching Support Network, Centres for Health Sciences and Practices.
17. Torgerson, D.J. and Torgerson, C.J. 2008. Designing randomised trials in health, education and the social sciences: An introduction Hampshire, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
18. Weeks, K.W., Lyne, P., Mosely, L. and Torrance, C. 2001. The strive for clinical effectiveness in medication dosage calculation problem solving skills. Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing, 5: 18-25.
19. Weeks, K.W. 2007. No more 'chalk and talk': Teaching drug calculation skills in the real world. http://www.authenticworld.co.uk/downloads/press/saferhealthcare.pdf (accessed August 12, 2009).
20. Weeks, K.W., Lyne, P. and Torrance, C. 2000. Written drug dosage errors made by students: The threat to clinical effectiveness and the need for a new approach. Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing, 4: 20-9.