BACKGROUND: Critical thinking is currently considered as an essential component of nurses' professional judgement and clinical decision-making. If confirmed, nursing curricula may be revised emphasising on critical thinking with the expectation to improve clinical decision-making and thus better health care.
DESIGN: Integrated literature review.
METHODS: The integrative review was carried out after a comprehensive literature search using electronic databases Ovid, EBESCO MEDLINE, EBESCO CINAHL, PROQuest and Internet search engine Google Scholar. Two hundred and 22 articles from January 1980 to end of 2015 were retrieved. All studies evaluating the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making, published in English language with nurses or nursing students as the study population, were included. No qualitative studies were found investigating the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making, while 10 quantitative studies met the inclusion criteria and were further evaluated using the Quality Assessment and Validity Tool. As a result, one study was excluded due to a low-quality score, with the remaining nine accepted for this review.
RESULTS: Four of nine studies established a positive relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making. Another five studies did not demonstrate a significant correlation. The lack of refinement in studies' design and instrumentation were arguably the main reasons for the inconsistent results.
CONCLUSIONS: Research studies yielded contradictory results as regard to the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making; therefore, the evidence is not convincing. Future quantitative studies should have representative sample size, use critical thinking measurement tools related to the healthcare sector and evaluate the predisposition of test takers towards their willingness and ability to think. There is also a need for qualitative studies to provide a fresh approach in exploring the relationship between these variables uncovering currently unknown contributing factors.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review confirmed that evidence to support the existence of relationships between critical thinking and clinical decision-making is still unsubstantiated. Therefore, it serves as a call for nurse leaders and nursing academics to produce quality studies in order to firmly support or reject the hypothesis that there is a statistically significant correlation between critical thinking and clinical decision-making.
METHODS: Twenty-seven adolescents with OCD and 46 controls completed a predictive-inference task, designed to probe how subjects' actions and confidence ratings fluctuate in response to unexpected outcomes. We investigated how subjects update actions in response to prediction errors (indexing mismatches between expectations and outcomes) and used parameters from a Bayesian model to predict how confidence and action evolve over time. Confidence-action association strength was assessed using a regression model. We also investigated the effects of serotonergic medication.
RESULTS: Adolescents with OCD showed significantly increased learning rates, particularly following small prediction errors. Results were driven primarily by unmedicated patients. Confidence ratings appeared equivalent between groups, although model-based analysis revealed that patients' confidence was less affected by prediction errors compared to controls. Patients and controls did not differ in the extent to which they updated actions and confidence in tandem.
CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents with OCD showed enhanced action adjustments, especially in the face of small prediction errors, consistent with previous research establishing 'just-right' compulsions, enhanced error-related negativity, and greater decision uncertainty in paediatric-OCD. These tendencies were ameliorated in patients receiving serotonergic medication, emphasising the importance of early intervention in preventing disorder-related cognitive deficits. Confidence ratings were equivalent between young patients and controls, mirroring findings in adult OCD research.
METHODS: To construct a practical value framework for traditional non-pharmacological therapies, a scoping review methodology was adopted to identify the evaluation domains and obstacles. A search, screening, and analysis process was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Evidence was retrieved from scientific databases and HTA agencies' websites.
RESULTS: The search strategy identified 5 guidelines records and 17 acupuncture HTA reports. By synthesizing the valuable reports of CPM and acupuncture evaluation in representative countries, this study found that Mainland China was promoting the comprehensive value assessment of CPM, whereas the United Kingdom, Singapore, Canada, the United States, and Malaysia had carried out the HTA evaluation of acupuncture for various conditions among which chronic pain was the most common. UK and Singapore applied the HTA results to support acupuncture reimbursement decisions. Three domains, including safety, effectiveness, and economy, were commonly adopted. The identified biggest challenge of evaluating traditional non-pharmacological therapies is the scarce high-quality clinical evidence.
CONCLUSIONS: This study identified value domains and issues of traditional therapies, and pointed out future research implications, to promote the development value framework of traditional therapies.