ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2022
Investigation of nurses' readiness levels in different wards of the hospital.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi Perspective Considerations for Health Smart Home: Early Phase Exploratory Study.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Increasing the rate of nursing process implementation: a quality improvement project at Wollega University Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, 2025.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Operating room technologists' knowledge, attitude, and preparedness for disaster management of a Zahedan: Implications for nursing disaster education.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The level of nurses' readiness and knowledge can significantly influence on the quality of treatment and patients' health. Nurses should have a high level of knowledge and understanding of clinical care and its aspects. According to this issue, our study has been performed with the aim to compare the readiness of different wards of the hospital in evaluating important indicators of clinical care. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed on 99 medical staff working in different wards of the hospital - during July 2020 to December 2021. Nurses in different wards of the hospital were compared in terms of care indicators. The tool used was a checklist for the effectiveness and evaluation of clinical care. The data were analyzed by SPSS statistical software. Findings: About 16.3% of the nurses were male, and 85.7% were female. Nurses in different wards were significantly different in terms of catheter and ligament care, blood transfusion and products, serum therapy and IV therapy, communication and training skills, pharmaceutical processes, and working with ventilators (p < 0.05). Emergency and general wards' nurses showed better readiness for pharmaceutical processes and emergency, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) ward nurses showed the best readiness in relation to catheter care and absorption and excretion processes and blood transfusion and products (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Despite an appropriate readiness in many wards, care readiness was placed on a lower extent in some wards. There were also limitations, strengths, and weaknesses in some aspects, including medication, care and standards, and infection control, which, because of this issue, can help improve nurses' performance in the future.
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.