Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37770894›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2023

International comparison of professional competency frameworks for nurses: a document analysis.

Renate F Wit, Anke J E de Veer, Ronald S Batenburg, Anneke L Francke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
11.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Polish Adaptation of the Nurse Professional Competence Scale.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Eco-nursing competencies for nurses: A scoping review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Renate F WitNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), PO Box 1568, Utrecht, 3513CR, The Netherlands. r.wit@nivel.nl.
Anke J E de VeerNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), PO Box 1568, Utrecht, 3513CR, The Netherlands.
Ronald S BatenburgNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), PO Box 1568, Utrecht, 3513CR, The Netherlands.
Anneke L FranckeNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (Nivel), PO Box 1568, Utrecht, 3513CR, The Netherlands.
Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNursing competency frameworks describe the competencies; knowledge, skills and attitudes nurses should possess. Countries have their own framework. Knowledge of the content of professional competency frameworks in different countries can enhance the development of these frameworks and international collaborations.

objectiveThis study examines how competencies and task divisions are described in the current professional competency frameworks for registered nurses (RNs with a Bachelor's degree) in the Netherlands, Belgium, the United Kingdom (UK), Canada and the United States (US).

methodsQualitative document analysis was conducted using the most recently published professional competency frameworks for registered nurses in the above-mentioned five countries.

resultsAll the competency frameworks distinguished categories of competencies. Three of the five frameworks explicitly mentioned the basis for the categorization: an adaptation of the CanMEDS model (Netherlands), European directives on the recognition of professional qualifications (Belgium) and an adapted inter-professional framework (US). Although there was variation in how competencies were grouped, we inductively identified ten generic competency domains: (1) Professional Attitude, (2) Clinical Care in Practice, (3) Communication and Collaboration, (4) Health Promotion and Prevention, (5) Organization and Planning of Care, (6) Leadership, (7) Quality and Safety of Care, (8) Training and (continuing) Education, (9) Technology and e-Health, (10) Support of Self-Management and Patient Empowerment. Country differences were found in some more specific competency descriptions. All frameworks described aspects related to the division of tasks between nurses on the one hand and physicians and other healthcare professionals on the other hand. However, these descriptions were rather limited and often imprecise.

conclusionsAlthough ten generic domains could be identified when analysing and comparing the competency frameworks, there are country differences in the categorizations and the details of the competencies described in the frameworks. These differences and the limited attention paid to the division of tasks might lead to cross-country differences in nursing practice and barriers to the international labour mobility of Bachelor-educated RNs.

Indexed as

CompetenciesNursingProfessional Competency FrameworksRegistered nurse

Identifiers

PMID37770894
PMCPMC10537821
OpenAlexW4387137013

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.