Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36618127›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

The listening project: A qualitative study on the experiences of pre-registered nurses during the Covid-19 pandemic in Scotland.

Kris Amor N Calica, Ruth E Paterson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Kris Amor N CalicaSchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Ruth E PatersonSchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: During the COVID 19 pandemic academic institutes worldwide were forced to shift to online or socially distanced learning. Nursing students faced unique challenges due to the limited practical learning environment and removal of supernumerary status to meet increased pressure on health care resources. Aim: To explore the experiences and perceptions of pre-registered nurses in relation to their university education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Underpinned by Lizzio (2006) [1] five senses of student success model, a novel qualitative approach using peer-to-peer discussion was utilized to explore the experiences of pre-registered nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Students who were on their second and final year in the nursing program were invited to participate. Interviews were conducted and transcribed using an online meeting platform. Data were analyzed using the five main stages of framework analysis. Results: Eleven peer-to-peer discussion with 22 students were conducted. The five themes were linked with the five senses student success model: capability, connectedness, purpose, resourcefulness, and culture. Six sub-themes emerged in the data: confidence and learning process, building relationships, communication, student as health professional and mental health consequences of COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: Whilst there was strength in university provision, the pandemic was an opportunity for students and academics to reflect and learn about how to further programme resilience and enhance student support processes. We recommend that nursing programmes should include concepts of transition, pandemic preparedness, collaboration with professional partners, and provision of catch-up sessions to analyse gaps on their skills and knowledge.

Indexed as

CoronavirusCOVID-19PandemicPre-registered nursesUniversity education

Identifiers

PMID36618127
PMCPMC9809001

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.