ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2025
Post-COVID-19 pandemic lived experiences of nurses about evidence-based care: A phenomenological study.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nursing Students' Experiences of Learning Evidence-Based Practice Through a Flipped Classroom: A Qualitative Study.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, nursing care was very complicated and confusing due to the special conditions of this time period and due to the lack of objective evidence to provide evidence-based nursing care. The purpose of this study was to post-COVID-19 investigate nurses' lived experiences of evidence-based care in Iran. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis research was conducted through a qualitative approach using Husserli's descriptive phenomenological method. The participants included nurses working in the wards of COVID-19. Sampling in this study was conducted using a targeted method. People were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. A code of ethics and necessary permits were received. Data collection was performed using unstructured interviews. The time of the interviews varied between 30 and 60 minutes. All interviews were recorded and then transcribed. The method proposed by Colaizzi was used for data analysis. Lincoln and Guba's criteria were used for the accuracy and robustness of the data. Also, MAXQDA software was used for data management.
resultsThe main themes and sub-themes in this study include barriers (lack of mastery in searching for evidence, lack of prioritization of evidence-based care, lack of availability of sufficient evidence, and the complexity of the condition of the COVID-19 disease) and facilitators (need for new evidence, a different care context, the need for extensive training, and the need to improve the nursing care).
conclusionThe findings of this research showed that based on the experiences of nurses, there are still barriers to patient care after the COVID-19 pandemic, and in addition, there are facilitators that are effective in the development of evidence-based care. We recommend that based on examining barriers and facilitators in this study, necessary planning should be performed to conduct applied research, develop clinical regulations, and better manage patients in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.