Observational studyNursing open2024
Hospital nurse managers' perspectives of the Magnet Recognition Program using an importance-performance analysis: A quantitative cross-sectional study.
Observational study in Nursing open, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo explore the perspectives of nursing managers in Korean hospitals on the Magnet Recognition Program using importance-performance analysis.
designA descriptive quantitative cross-sectional design with a survey methodology was used to evaluate nursing managers' perceptions of the Magnet Recognition Program criteria.
methodsAfter the Magnet Recognition Program's content validity was confirmed, an online survey was administered to 150 nursing managers from 10 hospitals. The results were analysed using importance-performance analysis.
resultsThe average importance of the questionnaire for the developed Magnet Recognition Program criteria was 3.19 ± 135 and the performance was 2.90 ± 222. Items corresponding to the areas 'Concentrate here', 'Keep up the good work', 'Possible overkill' and 'Low priority' were identified using two importance-performance analysis frames. The items corresponding to 'Concentrate here' included evidence-based nursing practice, the nursing professional practice model, nurses' participation in improving turnover rate and cases of innovation in nursing.
conclusionThis study highlights areas for improvement within the Magnet Recognition Program as perceived by Korean nursing managers, emphasizing evidence-based practice, professional models and nurses' involvement in turnover reduction and fostering innovation. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: To achieve Magnet recognition, hospitals must understand nursing managers' perspectives on the Magnet Recognition Program criteria. This study provides insights into enhancing the work environment for nurses in South Korean hospitals and lays the groundwork for developing effective Magnet certification programs. Introducing the Magnet program into South Korean hospitals may improve the overall nursing work environment and mitigate the serious problem of nursing staff turnover. REPORTING
methodThe findings were reported using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist.
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.