Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38108288›Full record

ArticleNursing ethics2024

Nurses' collegiality: An evolutionary concept analysis.

Mari Kangasniemi, Sunna Rannikko, Helena Leino-Kilpi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing ethics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Mari KangasniemiUniversity of Turku.ORCID 0000-0003-0690-1865
Sunna RannikkoUniversity of Turku.
Helena Leino-KilpiUniversity of Turku.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collegiality is one of the fundamental values of the nursing profession. During the nursing history, collegiality has been described as part of a nurse's relationship with their peers and it influences the quality of care they provide and job satisfaction and commitment to their work. Despite earlier definitions, the concept of collegiality in nursing has remained unclear. The aim of this study was to clarify the concept of collegiality in the nursing profession, using Rodger's evolutionary concept analysis. We carried out electronic searches using the CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, SocINDEX, PsycINFO and Eric databases and manual searches of the reference lists of the selected papers. The searches were limited to peer-reviewed papers published in English language from the inception of database to November 2022. This identified 25 papers. Based on our analysis, the attributes of the concept of collegiality were achieving mutual goals together with equality, reciprocity, trusted advocacy, powerful self-regulation and engaged belongingness. Antecedents of the concept included existing professional group, connection between professionals and professional self-esteem. The consequences were strengthening nurses' professional status, job satisfaction and their ability to provide the best possible patient care. We found that nurses' collegiality was a value-based concept, with a unique character based on professional connections. The concept brought together ethical and pragmatic strategies to achieve the best possible results for the nursing profession. Provided knowledge can be applied for further development of the concept and applying it in clinical research and practice. The concept of nurses' collegiality should also be studied in the future because both the profession and their working environment are constantly changing.

Indexed as

Concept FormationNursesHumansInterprofessional RelationsJob SatisfactionCollegialityconcept analysisethicsintra-professionalnurseRodger’s concept analysis

Identifiers

PMID38108288
PMCPMC11308294

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.