ArticleBMC nursing2025
Are nursing students ready for robotic nurses in obstetrics and gynecologic clinics? a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC nursing, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to examine the relationship between nursing students' perspectives towards robotic nurses in obstetrics and gynecologic clinics, their fear of robots, their negative attitudes towards robots, and their individual innovativeness.
methodsA correlational and cross-sectional research. This study was carried out between September and December 2024 by applying the Personal Data Collection Form, Individual Innovation Scale (IAS), Robot Anxiety Scale (RAS) and Negative Attitude Towards Robots Scale (NARS) to 330 students.
resultsThere was a statistically significant negative correlation was found between the RAS and NARS total and sub-dimension mean scores (p < .001). While there was a statistically significant negative correlation between the mean scores of the IIS and the total and sub-dimensional mean scores of the RAS and NARS (p < .001), a statistically significant positive correlation was found between the mean scores of the RAS total and sub-dimensional mean scores and the mean scores of the NARS total and sub-dimensional mean scores (p < .001). It is seen that the linear regression model in which the mean total scores of the IIS, RAS and NARS were set as independent variables and the opinion on the presence of robotic nurses in the obstetrics and gynecologic clinics was set as the dependent variable was statistically significant (F = 17.141; p < .001).
conclusionAs nursing students' positive views on the presence of robotic nurses in the obstetrics and gynecologic clinics increase, their sense of individual innovativeness increases and their robot anxiety and negative attitudes towards robots decrease. Providing in-service robotic nurses training can help healthcare organizations improve obstetrics and gynecologic nurses' attitudes towards robotic nurses, increase their robotic nurses literacy and reduce their anxiety.
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.