ArticleBMC nursing2020
A scoping review of admission criteria and selection methods in nursing education.
Article in BMC nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Association of Reading Comprehension and Science Aptitude with Early Success in a First-Semester BSN Cohort: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Adaptation and validation of Chinese version of the creativity and innovation effectiveness profile.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Exploring available admission criteria for a bachelor of science in nursing/midwifery: a scoping review.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Enhancing emotional intelligence and mental well-being for stress management in nursing education - a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- The Prevalence and Predictors of Compassion Satisfaction, Burnout and Secondary Traumatic Stress in Registered Nurses in an Eastern Canadian Province: A Cross-Sectional Study.The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Incremental Validity of Casper in Predicting Program and National Licensure Performance of Undergraduate Nursing Students: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Selection tests and their predictive value in university nursing students' success in the first year of study.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Identification of the components for investigation of the psychological strength of nursing applicants: A qualitative study.Nursing open · 2022Article
- Personal statement versus psychological test as admission to the nursing degree: an evaluation.BMC nursing · 2022Article
- Grit, Resilience, Mindset, and Academic Success in Physical Therapist Students: A Cross-Sectional, Multicenter Study.Physical therapy · 2022Article
- Predictive Validity of Preadmission Assessment on Early Nursing Academic Readiness: Impact of COVID-19.Nurse educatorArticle
- The Emotional Intelligence, Occupational Stress, and Coping Characteristics by Years of Nursing Experiences of Newly Hired Oncology Nurses.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursingArticle
- Admission Criteria for Undergraduate Nursing Programs: A Narrative Literature Review.SAGE open nursingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNursing education institutions are required to select and train applicants who have appropriate characteristics for delivering effective healthcare. Unlike other healthcare professions and despite the need to attract and select a competent workforce, there has been no comprehensive analysis of the selection criteria and methods used to recruit nursing students. As there is relatively limited prior research available, we conducted a scoping review to explore and synthesise the existing evidence regarding admission criteria and selection methods of nursing students and for the purpose of identifying an agenda for future research in this field.
methodsOur scoping review follows the Arksey and O'Malley five-step proposition including identifying the research question and relevant studies, study selection, tabulation of data, and summarizing and reporting the results. Seven databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, ERIC, SID, Irandoc and PsycINFO) were searched systematically using relevant keywords. Articles on admission of undergraduate nursing students published in both English and/or Persian from 2006 to 2019 were retrieved.
resultsExisting research evidence suggests that nursing students are largely selected on the basis of two criteria - "cognitive-academic abilities" and "non-cognitive abilities." Cognitive-academic abilities were assessed in four main dimensions of mathematics, language, natural sciences and reasoning skills mainly through standardized tests and academic records. Our review shows a wide range of non-cognitive characteristics are evaluated in nursing applicants including: morality, interpersonal communication skills and psychological strength. The selection method most commonly used to assess characteristics was through interviews (panel interviews or multiple mini interviews). Other methods included references, personal statements and personality assessment tools.
conclusionsThis is the first scoping review of literature regarding nursing education selection and recruitment. Results can be used to inform nursing education policymakers and institutions in the design of their selection practices. Future research should concentrate on the evaluation and improvement methods of student selection including content and predictive validity analysis of multiple mini interview and standardized tests, development of cost-effective selection methods and job analysis studies to identify specific non-cognitive characteristics for nursing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.