Author(s) and year | Study design, aim and samples |
---|---|
Aydin and Dinç (2017) [20] | Comparative design. Quantitative approach. To evaluate the effectiveness of web-based instruction in improving arithmetical and MDC skills, N 63. |
Cunningham and Roche (2001) [23] | Descriptive design. Quantitative approach. To determine competence in MDC through an online test, N 52. |
Craig et al. (2021) [24] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To determine whether errors could be reduced using ‘real-life’ situations, simulation. N 80. |
Edwards et al. (2019) [25] | Descriptive design. Collaborative approach. To determine whether errors could be reduced using ‘real-life’ situations, simulation. N 16. |
Glaister (2005) [26] | Comparative design. Quantitative approach. To determine the effect of different instructional approaches to knowledge acquisition regarding dosage calculation, N 9. |
Greenfield (2007) [27] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To determine whether errors could be reduced using personal digital assistant technology, N 87. |
Grugnetti et al. (2017) [28] | Comparative design. Quantitative approach. To verify whether calculator use reduces errors, N 78. |
Hitam (2020) [29] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To compare web-based instruction and traditional classroom learning in decreasing the number and types of errors in MDC. N 120. |
Maag (2004) [30] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To determine the effectiveness of an online interactive multimedia learning tool, N 96. |
Mackie and Bruce (2016) [4] | Descriptive design Quantitative approach. To determine whether online interventions are effective in decreasing the number and types of errors in MDC, N 65. |
McMullan et al. (2011) [31] | Comparative design. Quantitative approach. To compare an interactive e-drug calculations package with traditional handout learning support, N 229. |
Pereira et al. (2016) [32] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To evaluate the influence of the use of digital applications in learning about MDC, N 100. |
Ramjan et al. (2014) [33] | Mixed methods design. Quantitative approach. To identify strategies that help nurse academics tailor their drug calculation teaching, N 390. |
Shockley et al. (1989) [34] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To determine the effect of using calculators on an MDC examination; N 166. |
Tarnow and Werst (2000) [35] | Descriptive design. Quantitative approach. To examine the effectiveness of a calculator regarding scores on a drug calculation examination, N 85. |
Valizadeh et al. (2016) [36] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To measure individuals’ knowledge of drug prescription principles through an e-learning program, N 82. |
Van et al. (2016) [37] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To evaluate an e-learning course compared to face-to-face lectures, N 411. |
Wright (2008) [38] | Experimental design. Quantitative approach. To test the effectiveness of a range of strategies in improving retention of drug calculation skills; N 172. |