ArticlePloS one2025
Motivation of nursing undergraduate program entrants: A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation is of great importance in the teaching-learning process, because motivated students seek out opportunities and show interest and enthusiasm in carrying out their tasks. The objective of this review is to identify and present the information available in the literature on the status quo of motivation among nursing program entrants. This is a qualitative scoping review study, a type of literature review designed to map out and find evidence to address a specific research objective, following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. The objective was outlined using the PCC (Population, Concept, Context) acronym. The protocol was developed and registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform under DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/EJNGY. The search strategy and database selection were defined by a library and information science professional together with the authors. The search will be carried out in the following databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Literatura Latino Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde, Lilacs Esp, National Library of Medicine (PubMed), ScienceDirect, Scopus, and the Web of Science platform. The researchers will meet to discuss discrepancies and make decisions using a consensus model, and a third researcher will be tasked with independently resolving any conflicts. Data extraction will involve two independent researchers reviewing each article. Documents such as original articles; theoretical studies; experience reports; clinical study articles; case studies; normative, integrative, and systematic reviews; meta-analyses; meta-syntheses; monographs; theses; and dissertations in English, Portuguese, and Spanish from 2017 to 2023 were included. The results will be presented in tabular and/or diagrammatic format, along with a narrative summary.
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.