ArticleBMJ open2023
Systematic review and meta-synthesis protocol for examining policies mitigating the determinants of African nurses' and midwives' migration.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere has been a notable rise in the number of African nurses and midwives migrating to high-income countries despite varying policies and restrictions to promote retention. The need to comprehensively evaluate existing policies addressing the exodus is crucial to future policy formulation and steps in addressing drivers of nurses and midwives brain drain in Africa.
aimTo explore the existence of migration policies that address the drivers of nurse and midwives' migration outside Africa and determine the characteristics and implementation of these policies.
methodsThe review would be guided by the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of text and non-research evidence. Databases including CINAHL, PubMed, Academic Search Complete via Ebscohost and ISI Web of Science will be searched using a PICOS selection criteria framework. Grey literature would be gathered from Google Scholar, government and organisational websites. Two independent reviewers would be involved in searching, study selection, data extraction and data analysis. A third reviewer would provide an arbitrary judgement during conflicts when disagreements persist after discussion. A meta-synthesis would be used to identify and report emerging themes in the literature. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study does not require ethical approval. The findings would be published in peer-review journals and presented at research conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023395013.
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.