Journal of the Medical Library Association · Published 2025-10-23 · DOI 10.5195/jmla.2025.2163
Objective: Nurses must evaluate and sift through large quantities of information of varying quality as part of patient care. This study sought to determine nurses' evaluation criteria when encountering health information, including consumer health information written for the general public and scholarly sources, such as journal articles. Methods: We employed a mixed-methods approach with a survey and follow-up individual interviews. In both the survey and interviews, nurses were asked to evaluate information written for the general public or a scholarly audience. Interviewees were encouraged to think aloud to elucidate their criteria. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics and inductive thematic analysis. Results: Criteria used for both consumer and scholarly information were similar, with accuracy, relevance, authority, purpose, and currency as the most frequently reported. Nurses often relied on easily identifiable characteristics, such as where information came from, funding sources, intended audience, or its concordance with their prior knowledge. Nurses demonstrated awareness of the need to evaluate methodology in studies, especially empirical studies, for accuracy and relevance. However, they were less likely to evaluate methodology in review articles. Conclusions: Nurses value accurate, relevant information; however, their evaluation criteria are often superficial. Educators should encourage nursing students to engage more deeply with the nuances of evaluation. While many nurses pointed to research and peer review as evidence of accuracy, fewer demonstrated a deeper understanding of how to evaluate particular research methodologies, such as systematic reviews.
Abstract from DOAJ. Public domain (CC0 1.0).
Read the article at the publisher →