Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35832883›Full record

ArticleJournal of research in nursing : JRN2022

Nurses' intention to stay in the work environment in acute healthcare: a systematic review.

Asma Al Yahyaei, Alistair Hewison, Nikolaos Efstathiou, Debbie Carrick-Sen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of research in nursing : JRN, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Adapting across borders: Indonesian nurses' experiences in KSA.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Asma Al YahyaeiPhD Student, Lecturer, College of Nursing, Sultan Qaboos University, Sultanate of Oman.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0418-5287
Alistair HewisonReader, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8508-1967
Nikolaos EfstathiouLecturer/Adjunct Professor, University of Ottawa, MRes Clinical Health Research Programme Lead, School of Nursing, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Debbie Carrick-SenFoundation Clinical Professor of Nursing and Midwifery Research, School of Nursing, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: With staffing shortages affecting increasing numbers of health services globally, and predictions that shortages will worsen in the future, there is broad consensus that leaders at all levels must do more to support and develop current employees. However, the wide range of attributes of a healthy work environment identified in the literature and the financial implications of creating healthy work environments make it challenging to determine which elements of the nursing work environment are the most important in terms of workforce sustainability. This is a significant gap in our knowledge, and there is no consensus in the literature regarding definition and explanation of work environment factors in a way that facilitates prioritisation. Objectives: The aim of this review was to synthesise and evaluate the evidence of the factors which may have an effect on intention to stay and role of the work environment in enhancing nurses' intention to stay in the work environment in acute healthcare. Design and methods: This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed for relevant articles published between 1990 and December 2017 using the following electronic databases: Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source, ProQuest theses and dissertations, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) Plus, MEDLINE (Ovid) and PsycINFO. The reviewers independently screened the abstracts and full texts, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included papers using appropriate tools. Results: A total of 4968 studies were screened by title, abstract, and full-text review, and 29 studies were included in this review. The identified determinants of nurses' intention to stay were grouped into four main categories: individual indicators (personal and professional), organisation/profile, work environment, and patient-related. Several working environment variables identified in this review were significantly associated with the nurses' intention to stay. Conclusion: Despite the limitations of this review, the evidence indicates that attention to meso-level variables such as organisational characteristics and work environment is vital if the working environment is to improve and nurses' intention to stay is to increase. The multifaceted nature of the concept of intention to stay makes it difficult to present definitive conclusions based on the findings of this review. However, the identified theoretical models were instrumental in differentiating intention to stay from other concepts such as intention to leave, turnover and retention, theoretically, and operationally.

Indexed as

intention to stayleadershipnursessystematic reviewwork environment

Identifiers

PMID35832883
PMCPMC9272506

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.