Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39189281›Full record

ArticleNursing reports (Pavia, Italy)2024

Mapping and Characterizing Instruments for Assessing Family Nurses' Workload: Scoping Review.

António Dias, Beatriz Araújo, Élvio Jesus

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

António DiasUnidade de Saúde Familiar Saúde no Futuro, Unidade Local de Saúde Gaia e Espinho, 4400-043 Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1487-0248
Beatriz AraújoCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Health (CIIS), Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 4169-005 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-0266-2449
Élvio JesusCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Health (CIIS), Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 4169-005 Porto, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe importance of knowing the workload of family nurses lies essentially in the possibility of improving health outcomes, care processes and the nurse's professional life. There is a lack of studies that fully describe the nursing workload in primary care, particularly, in the context of family health nursing, and the ideal metrics to be used remain unknown, making it impossible to characterize and therefore provide the necessary insight to acknowledge the different contributions of several aspects that embody the global workload of family nurses. The objective of this scoping review was to map the known evidence and characterize the instruments used to assess the workload of family nurses.

methodsScoping review, according to the Joanna Briggs Institute, proposed a methodology for scoping reviews, consisting of three research stages: (1) an initial research in Medline and CINHAL; (2) an extended search, using keywords and search terms, in the following databases: JBI, CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE, Cochrane and Scopus; and (3) a search of the reference lists of the selected articles. No time limit was defined.

resultsFourteen studies referring to ten assessment instruments were included. Nine of them analyze workload as a dimension of a broader instrument, and two studies refer to an instrument that focuses exclusively on workload.

conclusionsThe diversity of professional competencies and contexts, the conceptual complexity of workload and the absence of a theoretical framework make it difficult to identify consensual instruments to assess the workload of family nurses. This study was prospectively registered with the Open Science Framework

Indexed as

family nursingscoping reviewworkload

Identifiers

PMID39189281
PMCPMC11348170

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.