ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2025
A National Evaluation of Undergraduate Nursing and Midwifery Curricula.
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reflections and Projections: The Next 50 Years of Priorities in Nursing Education.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Empowering tomorrow's nurses and midwives: transforming undergraduate programmes in responding to evolving healthcare environments.Evidence-based 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo conduct a comprehensive review of Undergraduate Nursing and Midwifery Curricula leading to registration in Ireland.
designA mixed methods approach using a curriculum evaluation framework that was underpinned by the philosophy and principles of appreciative inquiry.
methodsFive separate workstreams completed an evaluation of national policy documents and international curriculum documents, a literature review and two phases of stakeholder engagement including a graduate survey and peer-grouped stakeholder focus groups. The workstreams were emulated for the professions of nursing and midwifery.
resultsNational policy indicates a significant shift in healthcare delivery to the community environment, with a strong focus on the social determinants of health and a flexible interprofessional workforce. International curricula review revealed that nursing and midwifery education was split equally between academia and clinical practice at bachelor's degree level. Graduates were assessed for clinical competence with a variance of four to seven domains of competence evident for nurses and five principles for midwives. Direct entry midwifery was not widely available. The graduate survey identified that students were satisfied with the academic components of the curriculum; however, significant challenges in clinical placement were reported. Stakeholder focus groups reported a need for a learner-focused approach to the curricula, increased access to education, a deeper understanding and appreciation of the various roles required to educate nurses and midwives and a recognition of midwifery as a separate profession.
conclusionThere is a need for a significant revision of the current nursing and midwifery curricula to meet the future healthcare needs of the diverse patient population with a community-focused delivery. REPORTING
methodThe good reporting of a mixed methods study was used to guide the development of this manuscript. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: An Expert Advisory Group (EAG) was appointed to oversee the conduct of the research project and advise the research team as requested. There were five service user representatives included in the membership of the EAG. This included one representative from each of the divisions of the nursing and midwifery register in Ireland. A separate stakeholder engagement focus group was also conducted for the research upon the request from the service users.
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.