Full text
To the Editor:
Grasping a better understanding of the education that undergraduate nursing students receive is a first step toward acknowledging the big picture of the need to increase nutrition-based training. Nurses belong to one of the most trusted groups of professionals and have immediate access to patients in a variety of settings on a regular basis (Gaines, 2021). Because nutrition is known to improve health status, prevent disease, or prevent complications from existing disease, promoting proper nutrition in all people should be of utmost importance (Ruthsatz Candeias, 2020).
In a recent article, “A National Survey of Faculty Perceptions of Nutrition in Nursing Education,” published in the October 2020 issue of theJournal of Nursing Education, Chao et al. (2020) reviewed what educators believe students in their undergraduate nursing programs are receiving. However, how is this learning assessed? What methods are in place to ensure that learning has occurred and what is retained? Did students have to earn a particular level of achievement to be successful and pass the course?
As a nursing educator, it is important to understand the difference between content delivery and content understanding (González-Chordá Maciá-Soler, 2015). Evaluation of comprehension will identify if students are understanding and retaining the information that has been provided. Without this assessment and evaluation piece, there are no guarantees of learning.
Although the National Research Council suggests that undergraduate nursing students receive a minimum of 25 hours of nutrition instruction, it was given in 1985 (Kris-Etherton, et al., 2014), which is outdated. Furthermore, what does 25 hours of education in nutrition look like?
Education in nutrition is an important topic for study, and there is more work to be done. Although Chao et al. (2020) reviewed the perspectives of the faculty in baccalaureate nursing programs, associate degree and diploma programs should also be reviewed, as they often have less ability to include more hours in nontechnical courses. Furthermore, the perspective of the student and the bedside nurse should also be considered. Let us all work together in shifting nursing education to focus on wellness and prevention to reduce the need for treatment.
Editor s Note: At the time of publication, the authors could not be reached for a response.
Kendrah Cunningham, MSN, RN,
VA-BC
kcunningham30@liberty.edu
Liberty University
全文翻译（仅供参照）
致编写：
更好地领会本科照看专科学生采用的教训是招认须要推广基于营养的训练的大局的第一步。***属于最受信赖的专科群体之一，也许按期正在各类境况中马上战斗患者（盖恩斯，2021 年）。由于众所周知，营养也许改善强健环境、小心疾病或小心现有疾病引起的并发症，因而正在一切人中匆匆进妥善的营养应该是最主要的（Ruthsatz Candeias，2020 年）。
正在迩来宣布于 2020 年 10 月的《照看教训杂志》上的一篇文章“世界照看教训中教员营养见解考察”中，Chao 等人。（2020 年）回首了教训处事者以为本科照看课程的学生所采用的实质。不过，若何评估这种练习？有哪些方式也许确保练习一经产生并保全了甚么？学生是否必需取得一定水平的创建才华乐成并经过课程？
算作一位照看教训处事者，领会实质委托以及实质领会之间的区分很是主要（González-Chordá Maciá-Soler，2015 年）。领会评估将决定学生是否领会并保全已供给的信息。没有这个评估以及评估全体，就没法保险练习。
即使国家争论委员会提议本科照看专科学生至多采用 25 小时的营养疏导，但它是正在 1985 年给出的（Kris-Etherton 等人，2014 年），这一经过时了。其余，25 小时的营养教训是甚么样的？
营养教训是一个主要的争论问题，还有良多处事要做。虽然Chao 等人。（2020 年）检查了本科照看课程中教员的概念，也应检查副学士学位以及文凭课程，由于他们常常没有才略正在非本领课程中蕴含更多时光。其余，还招考虑学生以及床边***的概念。让咱们独特尽力，将照看教训变化为存眷强健以及小心，以削减调节须要。