Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39990062›Full record

ArticleSAGE open nursing

The Relationship Between the Emotional Intelligence and Clinical Decision-Making Among Nurses in Neonatal Intensive Care Units.

Ahmad Ayed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SAGE open nursing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

1 author.

Ahmad AyedFaculty of Nursing, Arab American University, Jenin, Palestine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2164-8183

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Emotional intelligence (EI) is crucial for managing stress, enhancing well-being, and improving clinical decision-making (CDM). In neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), where rapid decisions, emotional demands, and complex interactions are common, understanding how EI supports CDM is key to ensuring high-quality care and effective outcomes. Objective: This study aimed to explore the relationship between EI and CDM among NICU nurses. Methods: The study was cross-sectional in design and used a convenience sample of 178 NICU nurses. Data collection gathered by paper-based between 10 January and 10 April 2024, employing the "Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test" and the "CDM Scale." Results: The analysis revealed that the average EI score among participants was 151.9 ± 1.7 (range: 33-165, CI = 151.613-152.096), reflecting a high level of EI. High EI in the NICU context is characterized by nurses' ability to manage their own stress effectively, empathize with families facing emotional distress, and maintain composure in high-pressure situations. Similarly, participants demonstrated a high level of CDM, with an average score of 179.6 ± 8.6 (range: 40-200, CI = 178.349-180.770). High CDM involves making accurate and timely clinical decisions, such as assessing neonatal conditions, prioritizing interventions, and collaborating with interdisciplinary teams to ensure optimal outcomes. A significant positive relationship was found between EI and CDM ( Conclusion: Nurses in NICUs demonstrated both high EI and strong CDM skills. A positive association between these two variables was evident.

Indexed as

clinical decision-makingemotional intelligenceneonatal care unitnurses

Identifiers

PMID39990062
PMCPMC11846121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.