ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Determinants and outcomes of advanced practice nurses' leadership behaviours: an AI-aided mixed-methods systematic review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundAdvanced practice nurses play a vital role in healthcare innovation, delivering high-quality care and improving patient outcomes. Leadership is a core competency of advanced practice nurses, empowering them to drive systemic improvements and foster collaboration. However, these master-level educated nurses often encounter challenges in assuming leadership roles, including limited recognition and competing demands on their time. The growing volume of healthcare-related research, combined with the lack of a comprehensive evidence base on the determinants and outcomes of their leadership behaviours, complicates the development of effective programmes. This protocol outlines a systematic approach to addressing these challenges, using an AI tool to efficiently manage the expanding evidence base and provide a detailed understanding of the factors influencing advanced practice nurses' leadership behaviours.
methodsThis protocol follows the PRISMA-P 2015 guidelines to outline a systematic review investigating the determinants and outcomes of advanced practice nurses' leadership behaviours. It employs the SPIDER tool for eligibility criteria, encompassing studies that explore advanced practice nursing leadership behaviours and their determinants and outcomes. Eligible studies include quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods research, focusing on advanced practice nursing roles. The protocol also outlines a workflow for AI-aided title and abstract screening using ASReview LAB, incorporating multi-phase human validation to ensure accuracy and reliability. Data synthesis will utilise narrative synthesis for quantitative data and meta-aggregation for qualitative findings, integrating results through narrative weaving. DISCUSSION: This protocol addresses a critical gap in nursing research by systematically exploring the determinants influencing advanced practice nurses' leadership behaviours and their outcomes. It provides evidence to inform the development of tailored programmes aimed at empowering advanced practice nurses to maximise their leadership potential. Additionally, the protocol demonstrates how AI tools can enhance systematic review efficiency while maintaining methodological rigour. The findings will not only contribute to advancing nursing practice but also highlight the transformative potential of AI in research synthesis, ensuring timely and robust evidence generation amidst the expanding volume of healthcare-related research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42025644174.
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.