ArticleBMC nursing2025
Predictors of academic referrals among nursing and midwifery students: quantitative insights from Ghana.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAcademic referrals represent a significant challenge in nursing and midwifery education as they indicate student performance and retention weaknesses. However, the factors contributing to academic referrals have been underexplored, hampering efforts to develop effective interventions to support at-risk students.
objectiveThe study examined the demographic, academic, and institutional factors associated with academic referrals among nursing and midwifery students.
methodA cross-sectional survey was conducted with 402 nursing and midwifery students. The data were collected for demographic characteristics, academic level, marital status, age, institutional support, language barrier and assessment difficulties. Chi-square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression analyses were utilised to identify predictors of academic referrals.
resultsAcademic level and age were the significant predictors of referrals, with third-year students being 3.38 times more likely to be referred than second-year students (OR = 3.377, p < .001) and referred students were 0.6 years older than non-referred students (t = -2.157, p = .032). Females (60.6%) and married students (87.5%) recorded higher referral rates descriptively, though insignificant. Referred students reported greater language barriers (mean = 3.00 vs. mean = 2.69, p = .002), perceived the language used in exams as less clear (mean = 3.54 vs. mean = 3.79, p = .003), and reported lower institutional support (p = .040 and less helpful feedback (χ² = 11.097, p = .025). Referred students perceived written theory exams (30.6% vs. 18.7%) and multiple-choice assessments (6.8% vs. 6.0%) as more challenging than non-referred students (χ² = 15.130, p = .010).
conclusionThe findings emphasise the need for targeted interventions to support at-risk students, particularly those in advanced academic levels and older age groups. Strengthening institutional support, addressing language barriers, and improving assessment practices are important to reducing referrals and enhancing student success.
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.