SynthesisJournal of advanced nursing2026
International Competencies of Advanced Practice Nurses in Critical Care: An Integrative Review.
Synthesis in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- International Competencies of Advanced Practice Nurses in Critical Care: An Integrative Review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Pooled it
- [Structures and perspectives of intensive care and anesthesia nursing in Germany: a nationwide cross-sectional survey].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2026Article
- Developing Clinical Leadership in Orthopedic Nursing: A Qualitative Study to Identify the Components of a Complex Intervention.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- [Advanced nursing practice in intensive care units : Implementation and further development].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis review explores the roles, competencies, and scope of practice of APNs in critical care based on international literature. It also derives implications for the development of advanced nursing roles in Austria.
designIntegrative review. DATA SOURCES: The research team conducted a systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science to identify relevant peer-reviewed publications from 2007 to 2023. REVIEW
methodsA systematic search of electronic databases was undertaken, following Whittemore and Knafl's five-step methodology. The included publications met the defined inclusion criteria and were appraised for quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklists. Relevant data were extracted and thematically analysed.
resultsThe analysis of 14 international studies revealed recurring themes related to APN core competencies and scope of practice in critical care. These were structured according to Hamric's model. However, Austria faces several challenges, including limited legal frameworks, missing educational structures, and a lack of role clarity. These factors hinder the implementation of APN roles.
conclusionsInternationally, APNs demonstrate advanced clinical skills, provide leadership in team-based care, and integrate evidence-based practice. These attributes enhance patient outcomes and system efficiency. In Austria, restrictive regulations, limited education, and unclear roles hinder these competencies. Reform is needed to align with international standards, and further research should explore their implementation in Austria. IMPLICATIONS: A gap exists between internationally demonstrated APN competencies and the current state of advanced nursing practice in Austria. This highlights the need for clearer role definitions, regulatory frameworks, and educational strategies. Addressing this gap would strengthen APN roles and improve healthcare quality. This study highlights the need to bridge this disparity. REPORTING
methodThis review follows the PRISMA 2020 guidelines for systematic reviews Page et al. (2021). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
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.