Aims and objectives:To explore the evidence-based nursing practice (EBNP) competencies of clinical and academic nurses and their collaboration needs for supporting EBNP.Background: Academic-practice partnerships have strong potential to overcome the key barriers to EBNP. However, there is little known about the collaboration needs of clinical and academic nurses for EBNP. Design:A cross-sectional study. Methods:We recruited clinical and academic nurses online during November 2021 to January 2022. Using a reliable and validated scale and adapted questionnaires, data were collected relating to demographic information, EBNP-related resources availability, EBNP competencies and EBNP collaboration needs. These data were described using descriptive statistical methods. The t test, χ 2 test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to evaluate if the different responses between clinical and academic nurses were statistically significant. This study was reported following the STROBET checklist. Results: Two 240 clinical nurses and 232 academic nurses submitted questionnaires.There was no difference in overall EBNP competence between clinical and academic nurses. However, clinical nurses reported lower levels of competence and stronger intentions to collaborate with academic nurses when searching for, appraising, and synthesising evidence. Academic nurses reported lower levels of competence and stronger intentions to collaborate with clinical nurses for disseminating and implementing evidence. Conclusion:Clinical and academic nurses both reported high needs for collaborating to overcome their perceived role limitations. Clinical and academic nurses have different strengths and limitations in EBNP. These role differences and intentions to collaborate for different dimensions of EBNP competence suggest that clinical and

No abstract

IntroductionAcademic-practice partnerships are a promising strategy that could strengthen the promotion and innovation of evidence-based nursing practice (EBNP). However, there is little evidence of how academic and clinical institutions and individuals should collaborate in each process of EBNP and the factors that influence academic-practice partnerships in EBNP. There is a pressing need to explore the extent of the literature on academic-practice partnerships in EBNP, as well as to classify, compare and summarise the results or opinions obtained from various types of literature to identify both existing knowledge and gaps in the research.Methods and analysisThe scoping review will be conducted following the methodological guidelines provided by the JBI. The scoping review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. Seven databases, including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Educational Resource Information Center and two Chinese databases (ie, CNKI and WANFANG DATA), will be searched. The grey literature will also be searched using the American Association of Colleges of Nursing, American Nurses Association, Open Grey, Grey Literature Report and the official website of JBI. The literature screening and data extraction will be conducted independently by two researchers. A third researcher will be involved when a consensus is needed.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. The findings of the scoping review will be disseminated in a conference and a peer-reviewed journal.