Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35329283›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

A Concept Analysis of Nurses' Clinical Decision Making: Implications for Korea.

Sunyoung Oh, Minkyung Gu, Sohyune Sok

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

3 authors.

Sunyoung OhDepartment of Nursing, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Korea.
Minkyung GuDepartment of Nursing, College of Science and Technology, Daejin University, Pocheon-si 11159, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-7921-3102
Sohyune SokDepartment of Nursing, College of Nursing Science, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-7547-0224

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study's purpose was to identify the meaning and the attributes of Korean nurses' clinical decision making. A sequential and systematic literature review with reflection according to the conceptual analysis method of Walker and Avant was used in this study. Data sources included the National Assembly Library, the National Digital Science Library, ProQuest, PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL. Finally, twenty-six articles were included in this concept analysis. The concept of Korean nurses' clinical decision making consisted of the following attributes: clinical reasoning, choosing and applying challenging alternatives, and professional assessment and resetting. Antecedents consisted of: recognizing complex and diverse patient situations with high uncertainty, the need to solve problems according to priority, prior experience in clinical decision making, and interrelationships with fellow medical staff. Consequences consisted of: providing high-quality nursing services, improving the patient's safety, and increased satisfaction with clinical decision making. Based on these results, the conceptual attributes of Korean nurses' clinical decision making had slightly different characteristics but were organically interrelated. The results of analyzing the concept of Korean nurses' clinical decision making provide a better understanding of it and contribute to expanding nursing knowledge and developing a valid and reliable measurement.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingNursesDecision MakingHumansRepublic of Koreaclinical decision makingconcept formationKorea

Identifiers

PMID35329283
PMCPMC8951257

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.