Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32727573›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2020

Mentoring the working nurse: a scoping review.

Jerilyn Hoover, Adam D Koon, Erica N Rosser, Krishna D Rao

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Producing Mobility, Withholding Authority: Epistemic Drain and Nursing Sovereignty in Nepal.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jerilyn HooverCredence Management Solutions, LLC, the Global Health Technical Professionals, USAID, 8609 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 300, Vienna, VA, 22192, USA.
Adam D KoonDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. AdamKoon@jhu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9031-9810
Erica N RosserDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Krishna D RaoDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMentoring programs for nurses already in the health workforce are growing in importance. Yet, the settings, goals, scale, and key features of these programs are not widely known.

objectiveTo identify and synthesize research on in-service nurse mentoring programs.

methodsWe reviewed nurse mentoring research from six databases. Studies either referred explicitly to in-service nurse mentoring programs, were reviews of such programs, or concerned nurse training/education in which mentoring was an essential component.

resultsWe included 69 articles from 11 countries, published from 1995 to 2019. Most articles were from high-income countries (n = 46) and in rural areas (n = 22). Programs were developed to strengthen clinical care (particularly maternal and neonatal care), promote evidence-based practice, promote retention, support new graduate nurses, and develop nurse leaders. Of the articles with sufficient data, they typically described small programs implemented in one facility (n = 23), with up to ten mentors (n = 13), with less than 50 mentees (n = 25), meeting at least once a month (n = 27), and lasting at least a year (n = 24). While over half of the studies (n = 36) described programs focused almost exclusively on clinical skills acquisition, many (n = 33) specified non-clinical professional development activities. Reflective practice featured to a varying extent in many articles (n = 29). Very few (n = 6) explicitly identified the theoretical basis of their programs.

conclusionsAlthough the literature about in-service nurse mentoring comes mostly from small programs in high-income countries, the largest nurse mentoring programs in the world are in low- and middle-income countries. Much can be learned from studying these programs in greater detail. Future research should analyze key features of programs to make models of mentoring more transparent and translatable. If carefully designed and flexibly implemented, in-service nurse mentoring represents an exciting avenue for enhancing the role of nurses and midwives in people-centered health system strengthening. The contents in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the U.S. Agency for International Development or the U.S. Government.

Indexed as

NursesClinical CompetenceEvidence-Based PracticeHumansLeadershipMentoringQuality of Health CareHuman Resources for HealthMentoringNursingQuality of Health CareRural Health

Identifiers

PMID32727573
PMCPMC7388510
OpenAlexW3046036321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.