Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36181260›Full record

ArticleJournal of nursing management2022

Development, implementation and evaluation of a Professional Practice Model: A scoping review.

Gemma Doleman, Di Twigg

Open access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nursing management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gemma DolemanSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5566-5681
Di TwiggSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia.
Edith Cowan University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe aim of this study is to synthesize available literature describing the development, implementation and evaluation of a Professional Practice Model.

backgroundA Professional Practice Model is an overarching theory-based framework that depicts nursing values and defines the structure and process of nursing care. No research has synthesized available literature on this topic in recent times. EVALUATION: A review of English language papers was published from 2015 to 2022. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. KEY ISSUES: All studies highlighted the importance of having a Professional Practice Model that reflects nursing care activities and resonates with nurses across an organization. This is achieved through strong leadership and clinical nurse involvement during the development, implementation and evaluation phases. In addition, a model should be adapted to keep up to date with scientific changes relevant to nursing.

conclusionsThis review adds to the body of knowledge on the development, implementation and evaluation of a Professional Practice Model. Future research exploring the benefit of a Professional Practice Model on patient outcomes would be useful. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The key elements of a Professional Practice Model including six components and theoretical foundation have been summarized in this review. Nurse leaders should consider these key elements in the creation of a Professional Practice Model. For successful enculturation, a Professional Practice Model needs to be relevant to all nurses and easy for them to articulate.

Indexed as

LeadershipProfessional PracticeHumansdevelopmentevaluationimplementationmagnetProfessional Practice Model

Identifiers

PMID36181260
PMCPMC10092800
OpenAlexW4298326420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.