Background Preclinical nursing students often report difficulty applying all phases of the nursing process, which may undermine confidence and contribute to unfavorable perceptions of its usefulness. Simulation‐based learning (SBL) designed using the NLN/Jeffries simulation framework provides structured practice and feedback in a psychologically safe environment. Purpose To examine pre‐ to postchanges in undergraduate nursing students’ self‐confidence in using the nursing process and their attitudes toward it after participation in an NLN/Jeffries framework–guided SBL series. Design and Methods A quasiexperimental one‐group pretest–posttest design was used. Students completed three hybrid simulation sessions (pneumonia and Type 2 diabetes mellitus) with structured prebriefing and PEARLS debriefing. Outcomes were a 15‐item Nursing Process Utilization Self‐Confidence Scale ( α = 0.90) and a 16‐item Attitude Toward the Nursing Process Scale adapted from Bowman et al. ( α = 0.93). Paired t ‐tests were used with effect sizes (Cohen’s dz ) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mean differences. Results Of the 62 consenting students, 54 provided matched pre/post data. Total self‐confidence was higher at posttest than pretest (mean difference = 3.11, 95% CI: 0.31−5.91; p = 0.03; dz = 0.30), with significant gains in assessment/diagnosis and planning. Implementation and evaluation subscale changes were not statistically significant. Total attitude scores did not differ (mean difference = −0.44; p = 0.643); however, agreement decreased for two items, reflecting misconceptions about the nursing process. Conclusions In this exploratory, uncontrolled study, participation in the NLN/Jeffries framework–guided simulation was associated with higher self‐reported self‐confidence in using the nursing process, particularly in assessment/diagnosis and planning. Findings may inform future curriculum development and larger controlled studies.
Abuijlan et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: