ArticleNursing open2024
University innovation and start-ups: Barriers and facilitators experienced by nursing faculties - A content analysis study.
Article in Nursing open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Entrepreneurial training in public health postgraduate programs: a systematic review of educational approaches.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- A Method for Enabling Digital Health Technologies in Clinical and Translational Research at an Academic Medical Center.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2025Article
- University innovation and start-ups: Barriers and facilitators experienced by nursing faculties - A content analysis study.Nursing open · 2024Article
- The Relationship Between Individual Innovativeness and Start-Up Attitude Among Nursing Students: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimUniversity start-ups have gained significant popularity as a means of translating knowledge and research into practical applications. However, there is a lack of understanding regarding the experiences and perspectives of nursing faculties engaged in start-up ventures. The objective of this study was to explore valuable insights into the barriers and facilitators within this context for promoting success, generating entrepreneurial attitudes, as well as enhancing the sustainability of nursing faculty-led start-ups.
designWe employed a content analysis methodology to capture the real-life experiences of nursing faculties involved in university start-ups. This approach is an effective way to gain a comprehensive understanding of the subject.
methodsData were collected using semi-structured interviews. Graneheim and Lundman's step was used for analysis and to identify recurring patterns and themes within the collected data. Sampling was done purposefully, with convenience and snowball techniques until data saturation. The MAXQDA version 10 software was utilised to easily analyse, code and present data.
resultsThe analysis revealed four major themes encompassed: motivational factors, personal attributes, limited entry support and barriers to scaling. These themes shed light on factors, support systems, challenges faced during growth as well as personal characteristics highlighted by the participants. Our study highlighted the factors influencing entrepreneurship in nursing faculties. Addressing the challenges of this study requires enhancing support systems and fostering personal development for entrepreneurial success in healthcare innovation. Policymakers can promote university education to expand the entrepreneurship process using more facilities and make more services accessible.
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.