ReviewJournal of family medicine and primary care2024
Augmenting the spirit of research among nursing personnel: A narrative review.
Review in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assaulting Medical Neutrality: Reflections on Attacks on Healthcare and Clinicians in the Two World Wars and Implications for Contemporary Conflicts.Nursing inquiry · 2025Review
- Current status and influencing factors of pediatric clinical nurses' scientific research ability: a survey.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Strategies to improve evidence-based practice competencies in nursing education: Addressing the need of the hour.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- How to spark the potential of research in nursing students?Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Empowering nursing research: Overcoming challenges and embracing opportunities to improve patient care.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In health-related technology, the professionalism paradigm has shifted from a traditional-based approach to evidence-based nursing practice (EBP). For nurses, EBP as a systematic approach to problem solving is well supported and is based on translating the best current research findings into a decision made on patient care or nursing intervention. Objective: To review the strategies to develop the research capacity among nurses. Design: A keyword search was used to locate relevant articles. Bibliographic data were retrieved from PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, CINAHL, and Medline. A total of 100 articles were retrieved, and 27 were included in the article. Results: Major challenges affecting the development of research skills have been identified including lack of time for research, high teaching loads, and need to balance this work with administrative and clinical responsibilities, Lack of funding, shortage of skilled personnel, and absence of research infrastructure. Some of the skills identified in the literature for augmenting research capacity, i.e., infrastructure development, promotion of research cultures and environments, and facilitation of training. Conclusion: However, more empirical studies are needed to understand the process of implementing and evaluating capacity building in nursing, clinical as well as academic. Capacity building is globally important because it can improve the quality of nursing education, the caliber of nurses, and the standard of care that patients receive.
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.