Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40808860›Full record

ArticleJournal of nursing management2025

Organizational Position and Structural Empowerment in Chinese Community Nursing: An Interpretive Case Study.

Bo Li, Juan Chen, Natasha Howard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nursing management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Bo LiDepartment of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7801-0319
Juan ChenDepartment of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1038-4162
Natasha HowardSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-4174-7349

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nurse empowerment is widely recognized for advancing professional development and job satisfaction, yet its structural dimensions remain underexplored in China's community nursing sector. Guided by Kanter's structural empowerment theory, this interpretive case study examines how formal hierarchies and informal organizational dynamics converge to shape community nurses' access to power in nonward settings. Drawing on 24 semistructured remote interviews and unstructured observations in Shenzhen, four interrelated themes were identified: (1) dual-function caregiving roles, (2) entitlement to formal power, (3) variation in informal roles, and (4) inequities in informal power. Each theme explicitly connects to core components of structural empowerment, access to supply, information, support, and opportunities, illustrating how organizational structures and interpersonal relationships jointly shape nurses' empowerment experiences. Findings reveal tensions between formal structures intended to promote empowerment and informal dynamics that sustain power asymmetries. By unpacking these layered power relations, the study offers critical insight into structural empowerment in decentralized nursing contexts and calls for both policy and managerial reforms to foster inclusive, ethically grounded organizational cultures.

Indexed as

Community Health NursingEmpowermentPower, PsychologicalAdultChinaFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicJob SatisfactionOrganizational Case StudiesOrganizational CultureQualitative Researchcommunity nursingnurse empowermentnursing managementorganizational theoryprofessional relationshipsworkplace equity

Identifiers

PMID40808860
PMCPMC12349986

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.