SynthesisJournal of advanced nursing2026
Innovation Competence in Healthcare: Individual, Environmental and Organisational Factors-A Mixed-Method Systematic 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 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo identify healthcare professionals' experiences of innovation competence and the factors associated with it; and to examine the instruments developed to assess innovation competence and its associated factors among healthcare professionals.
designA mixed-methods systematic review.
methodsResearchers independently screened original studies by title and abstract (n = 2996) and then full text (n = 189). Eighteen studies were included: 16 quantitative and two qualitative. Qualitative data were analysed using inductive content analysis, and quantitative data were tabulated and synthesised narratively. DATA SOURCES: The review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute Mixed Methods Systematic Review methodology. Searches were conducted in Scopus, CINAHL, Ovid Medline, ProQuest, Web of Science, PsycArticles, and Medic. Articles published in English or Finnish with no date restrictions were included. The search covered records from database inception to August 2024.
resultsFrom qualitative studies, we identified three categories describing experiences of innovation competence: Competences for Innovation in Healthcare, Application and Impact of Innovation in Healthcare, and Challenges and Strategies for Implementing Innovation. Quantitative studies identified three conceptual domains: Individual Capacities in Innovation, Innovation-related Competence Behaviours, and Social and Organisational Enablers. Four categories of factors associated with innovation competence emerged: sociodemographic, career-related, organisational, and academic factors.
conclusionsHealthcare professionals' innovation competence is a multifaceted construct encompassing individual abilities, behavioural expressions, and social and organisational engagement. A systematic and multilevel approach that targets both personal attributes and organisational enablers is needed to strengthen competence. Enhancing innovation competence can improve the healthcare sector's ability to respond to complex challenges and sustain innovation capacity. IMPACT: Findings inform the development of education programmes and leadership strategies to enhance innovation competence among healthcare professionals, supporting innovation implementation in healthcare organisations. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public involvement was included in this study.
trial registrationPROSPERO: CRD42024614551.
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.