ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2025
Community-based health programme for nurses and midwives: A mixed methods evaluation.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2025. 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.
- Community-based health programme for nurses and midwives: A mixed methods evaluation.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo evaluate a community-based psychological health and well-being programme for nurses and midwives.
designMixed methods programme evaluation.
methodsFour studies were included: observational descriptive study (cross-sectional survey) of the health, well-being and experiences of previous programme participants (Study 1); observational exploratory prospective cohort study (longitudinal survey) of health, well-being and experiences of participants who engaged in the programme from 2020 to 2023 (Study 2); qualitative descriptive study (interviews) of experiences and perceptions of nurses and midwives who have engaged with the programme as participants or clinicians (Study 3); observational descriptive study (cross-sectional survey) of experiences and perceptions of programme stakeholders (Study 4). Surveys included validated measures. Data were collected online. Descriptive, repeated measures and thematic analyses were conducted.
resultsOne-hundred and fifteen participants completed Study 1: 20% (n = 23) reported stress in the severe-to-extremely severe category; 22% (n = 25) reported psychological distress in the moderate-to-severe category. Thirty-one programme participants were followed in Study 2: the effect of the programme on participant well-being over time was not significant. Sixteen programme participants and eight programme clinicians were interviewed (Study 3). Experiences of nurses and midwives engaging with the programme were highly positive and strong attributes of the programme included (1) shared professional experience of clinicians and participants which supported a common language and facilitated understanding, and (2) effective programme leadership, and autonomy and flexibility in the clinicians' role which enabled and supported a positive working experience. Thirty-nine broader stakeholders participated in a cross-sectional survey (Study 4). All stakeholders reported high satisfaction with the programme. Participants considered the programme being 'by nurses and midwives, for nurses and midwives' critical to the programme's success and value.
conclusionsThe community-based psychological health and well-being programme developed, led and delivered by nurses and midwives, for nurses and midwives, was a highly valued resource. IMPACT: Levels of stress and burnout in the health workforce are high. A community-based psychological health and well-being programme for nurses and midwives was found to be an important and highly valued resource for nurses and midwives. A programme delivered by nurses and midwives, for nurses and midwives, was considered critical to programme success. Programme leadership, and autonomy and flexibility in the programme clinicians' roles, facilitated and supported a positive working experience for programme clinicians. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: Quality and safety in patient care is directly impacted by the well-being of nurse and midwives. A community-based psychological health and well-being programme for nurses and midwives was found to be an important and highly valued resource for nurses and midwives. REPORTING
methodSurvey findings were reported according to STROBE (von Elm et al. in Lancet, 370:1453-1457, 2007) and qualitative findings according to COREQ (Tong et al. in International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6):349-357, 2007). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
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.