What this article is about
In brief
In a one-group pre-survey/post-survey dissertation study, nursing students enrolled in a mental health course scored higher on every trauma-informed care knowledge item after a researcher-led education session; the abstract reports p = 0. 001 for each item but provides no effect sizes or comparison group.
For nursing students
Study summary
Meredith Kissel Malone’s 2019 doctoral dissertation examined whether focused instruction could change nursing students’ knowledge of trauma and trauma-informed care. The dissertation’s rationale cites adverse childhood experience research and argues that nurses need to understand how trauma may affect health.
Students enrolled in a mental health nursing course completed a survey, attended an education session delivered by the researcher, and completed a post-survey. The quantitative, quasi-experimental study compared scores with a paired t-test.
The abstract reports that mean knowledge scores increased across all surveyed topics and every item had a p-value of 0.001. This indicates that the observed pre/post differences would be unusual under a null model of no difference; it does not describe how large or educationally important the gains were.
The study documents measured knowledge change in this cohort. It does not establish that the session alone caused the change because there was no comparison group. The abstract also omits participant count, effect sizes, survey reliability, intervention details, and later assessment of retained knowledge or clinical behaviour.
Original publication
Source abstract and study details
Read the source abstract
According to Felitti, et al, (1998) more than half of the population had one exposure to an adverse childhood experience. Knowing this, the healthcare system must be prepared to care for these individuals. Unfortunately, unless nurses are being trained in their institutions they are not receiving TIC education in theory undergraduate studies. This raises the question of how are they expected to care for these patients if they do not know the correlation trauma has on their physical, emotional and cognitive health. The purpose of this research study was to ascertain the impact of a trauma and trauma-informed care education session on nursing students who were currently enrolled in a mental health nursing course. This quantitative, quasi-experimental research study was completed by implementing a pre-survey, followed by an education session which was given by the researcher, and then a post-survey was administered. The researcher conducted a paired t-test to analyze the data from both surveys to determine the statistical significance. The research question revealed a significant finding. The mean score of the pre-survey and the post-survey displayed an increase in knowledge of all the topics included in the survey. The findings also supported the fact that even though the nursing students were knowledgeable, the education session reinforced and expanded their knowledge. The p-value or significance of all the survey questions were 0.001. which indicates the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is true. In conclusion, even though nursing students perceive they are knowledgeable of trauma and trauma-informed care the post-survey results revealed an increase in knowledge for each individual survey question.
Reviewed findings
Main findings
- Nursing students completed a pre-survey, a researcher-led trauma-informed care session, and a post-survey while enrolled in a mental health nursing course.
- Mean knowledge scores increased for every topic represented in the survey.
- The abstract reports p = 0.001 for each survey item, but does not report effect sizes or confidence intervals.
For teaching and learning
Education implications
- The result supports further testing of dedicated trauma-informed care instruction within nursing curricula.
- Adoption decisions require intervention content, participant count, measurement quality, effect magnitude, and knowledge retention.
- No patient-care or clinical-behaviour outcome was measured in the accessible abstract.
For educators
Teaching and appraisal notes
This dissertation offers a compact example of a one-group pretest-posttest evaluation. Its survey, instruction, repeat-survey sequence fits the stated aim, and a paired t-test fits repeated measurements from the same participants.
Students can distinguish statistical significance from effect magnitude, identify testing and concurrent-learning threats in an uncontrolled design, and ask what would demonstrate transfer beyond a knowledge survey. The abstract reports p = 0.001 for every item but no effect sizes, confidence intervals, participant count, instrument properties, or follow-up outcomes.
Curriculum decisions should remain provisional. Replication requires the full intervention content, sampling information, measurement instrument, and a design capable of assessing retention and application.
Critical appraisal
Limitations
- The abstract does not report participant count, sampling method, effect sizes, confidence intervals, or survey validity and reliability.
- The one-group pre/post design has no comparison group, leaving testing effects and concurrent course learning as alternatives.
- The abstract reports knowledge scores only; it does not describe retained knowledge or observed clinical practice.
Classroom use
Discussion Questions
- What can the reported p-values tell readers, and what cannot be judged without effect sizes and confidence intervals?
- Which threats arise when the same cohort completes a survey before and after instruction without a comparison group?
- What outcomes would show that knowledge was retained and applied during nursing practice?
Source-based questions
Frequently asked questions
What did the dissertation test?
It compared nursing students’ trauma-informed care knowledge before and after a researcher-led education session in a mental health course.
How should p = 0.001 be interpreted?
The abstract reports statistically significant pre/post differences. The p-values do not show the size of the gains or prove that the session alone caused them.
What is needed before another program adopts the session?
The full dissertation should be checked for participant characteristics, intervention content, survey quality, effect sizes, and retention or clinical transfer.