Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To provide a scoping review of the existing literature regarding academic-practice partnership in evidence-based nursing education, with the goal of gathering evidence to support the establishment of such partnerships.
BACKGROUND: Academic-practice partnerships play a crucial role in overcoming separation of theory and practice in evidence-based nursing education and promoting the adoption of evidence-based nursing practice. However, there is a lack of scoping review of related literature.
METHODS: This scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute updated methodology for scoping reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE, Educational Resource Information Centre (ERIC) and five gray websites between November and December, 2022. A total of 10515 articles were retrieved, 26 articles were included in the scoping review. Two reviewers reviewed the articles, screened literature, and extracted data, independently. A third researcher was involved when consensus is needed. Practice-academic partnership logic model was used to analysis and synthesis the results.
RESULTS: Main themes included inputs (time, instructional resources, partnership agreement, key stakeholder commitment, shared mission, leadership support, common vision, instructional design, mutual respect, and instructional objectives), activities (ongoing communication and shared decision-making), outputs (action plan: evidence-based nursing project plans and educational resources), outcomes (improved evidence-based nursing competency, enhanced quality of nursing care, career advancement and personal development, increased evidence-based nursing projects, improve evidence-based nursing education, heightened academic achievement, increased engagement in evidence-based nursing, increased networking opportunities, and improved staff satisfaction), facilitators (sufficient inputs, effective activities, and clear partnership structure, ongoing feedback, and positive outcomes), and barriers (insufficient inputs).
CONCLUSIONS: Inputs and activities could lead to outputs and outcomes. Facilitators and barriers could influence the degree of outputs and outcomes. Academic-practice partnerships can overcome the barriers of disconnection between theory and practice in evidence-based nursing education, and further promote education and research by leveraging the strengths of both parties, resulting in a mutually beneficial collaboration.
BACKGROUND: Academic-practice partnerships play a crucial role in overcoming separation of theory and practice in evidence-based nursing education and promoting the adoption of evidence-based nursing practice. However, there is a lack of scoping review of related literature.
METHODS: This scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute updated methodology for scoping reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE, Educational Resource Information Centre (ERIC) and five gray websites between November and December, 2022. A total of 10515 articles were retrieved, 26 articles were included in the scoping review. Two reviewers reviewed the articles, screened literature, and extracted data, independently. A third researcher was involved when consensus is needed. Practice-academic partnership logic model was used to analysis and synthesis the results.
RESULTS: Main themes included inputs (time, instructional resources, partnership agreement, key stakeholder commitment, shared mission, leadership support, common vision, instructional design, mutual respect, and instructional objectives), activities (ongoing communication and shared decision-making), outputs (action plan: evidence-based nursing project plans and educational resources), outcomes (improved evidence-based nursing competency, enhanced quality of nursing care, career advancement and personal development, increased evidence-based nursing projects, improve evidence-based nursing education, heightened academic achievement, increased engagement in evidence-based nursing, increased networking opportunities, and improved staff satisfaction), facilitators (sufficient inputs, effective activities, and clear partnership structure, ongoing feedback, and positive outcomes), and barriers (insufficient inputs).
CONCLUSIONS: Inputs and activities could lead to outputs and outcomes. Facilitators and barriers could influence the degree of outputs and outcomes. Academic-practice partnerships can overcome the barriers of disconnection between theory and practice in evidence-based nursing education, and further promote education and research by leveraging the strengths of both parties, resulting in a mutually beneficial collaboration.
摘要：
目的：对有关循证护理教育中学术-实践伙伴关系的现有文献进行范围审查，目的是收集证据以支持建立这种伙伴关系。
背景：学术-实践伙伴关系在克服循证护理教育中理论与实践的分离以及促进循证护理实践的采用方面发挥着至关重要的作用。然而,缺乏相关文献的范围审查。
方法：本范围审查是根据JoannaBriggsInstitute更新的范围审查方法进行的，并根据系统审查和Meta分析扩展的首选报告项目进行报告。
方法：我们在PubMed中进行了全面搜索，WebofScience,Scopus,科克伦图书馆,CINAHL,EMBASE,教育资源信息中心（ERIC）和11月至12月期间的五个灰色网站，2022年。共检索到10515篇文章,范围审查中包括26篇文章。两位审稿人审阅了这些文章，筛选文献，提取的数据，独立。当需要达成共识时，第三位研究人员参与其中。采用实践-学术伙伴关系逻辑模型对结果进行分析和综合。
结果：主要主题包括输入（时间，教学资源,合伙协议,关键的利益相关者承诺，共享使命,领导支持,共同愿景,教学设计，相互尊重,和教学目标)，活动(持续沟通和共同决策)，产出（行动计划：循证护理项目计划和教育资源），结果(提高循证护理能力，提高护理质量，职业发展和个人发展，增加循证护理项目，加强循证护理教育，提高学术成就，增加对循证护理的参与度，增加网络机会，和提高员工满意度)，促进者(足够的投入，有效的活动,和明确的伙伴关系结构，持续的反馈，和积极的结果)，和障碍(投入不足)。
结论：投入和活动可能导致产出和结果。促进者和障碍可能会影响产出和结果的程度。学术实践伙伴关系可以克服循证护理教育中理论与实践脱节的障碍，并利用双方的优势进一步促进教育和研究，形成互利合作。
背景：学术-实践伙伴关系在克服循证护理教育中理论与实践的分离以及促进循证护理实践的采用方面发挥着至关重要的作用。然而,缺乏相关文献的范围审查。
方法：本范围审查是根据JoannaBriggsInstitute更新的范围审查方法进行的，并根据系统审查和Meta分析扩展的首选报告项目进行报告。
方法：我们在PubMed中进行了全面搜索，WebofScience,Scopus,科克伦图书馆,CINAHL,EMBASE,教育资源信息中心（ERIC）和11月至12月期间的五个灰色网站，2022年。共检索到10515篇文章,范围审查中包括26篇文章。两位审稿人审阅了这些文章，筛选文献，提取的数据，独立。当需要达成共识时，第三位研究人员参与其中。采用实践-学术伙伴关系逻辑模型对结果进行分析和综合。
结果：主要主题包括输入（时间，教学资源,合伙协议,关键的利益相关者承诺，共享使命,领导支持,共同愿景,教学设计，相互尊重,和教学目标)，活动(持续沟通和共同决策)，产出（行动计划：循证护理项目计划和教育资源），结果(提高循证护理能力，提高护理质量，职业发展和个人发展，增加循证护理项目，加强循证护理教育，提高学术成就，增加对循证护理的参与度，增加网络机会，和提高员工满意度)，促进者(足够的投入，有效的活动,和明确的伙伴关系结构，持续的反馈，和积极的结果)，和障碍(投入不足)。
结论：投入和活动可能导致产出和结果。促进者和障碍可能会影响产出和结果的程度。学术实践伙伴关系可以克服循证护理教育中理论与实践脱节的障碍，并利用双方的优势进一步促进教育和研究，形成互利合作。
