Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39188551›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of nursing studies advances2024

The development of nursing-sensitive indicators: A critical discussion.

Edel Gormley, Michael Connolly, Mary Ryder

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Beyond the infusion: nursing at the vanguard of cytokine release syndrome rescue in CAR-T cell therapy.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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.

Edel GormleyUniversity College Dublin (UCD) School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Michael ConnollyUniversity College Dublin (UCD) School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Mary RyderUniversity College Dublin (UCD) School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Discussion arguments: In a science-based profession, nurses must continuously monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of their care. However, data on what constitutes nursing care in practice and the delivery process is lacking. Insufficient evidence on how nurses contribute to patient care hampers the evaluation of nursing practice.We discuss nursing-sensitive indicators, their origins, current applications, and challenges related to their use in evaluating the quality of nursing care. We analyse nursing-sensitive indicators in the context of criticisms levelled at the profession related to the lack of evidence to support their value in the larger healthcare environment. Conclusions: We have a disjointed approach to evaluating nursing care. Current systems designed to monitor nursing care, such as metrics and data sets, are not adequate or effective for comprehensively evaluating nursing care, considering the fundamentals and values of the nursing profession.

Indexed as

Nurse's roleNursingNursing careNursing indicatorsQualityValues

Identifiers

PMID39188551
PMCPMC11345314

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.