ReviewIranian journal of nursing and midwifery research
Identification of Factors Related to the Research Vitality of Faculty Members in Medical Universities: A Scoping Review.
Review in Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vitality, as a key component of mental wellbeing, is considered essential within research systems and academic institutions. This study aims to identify the factors associated with the research vitality of faculty members at medical universities. Materials and Methods: This scoping review was conducted in 2024 following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Between April and August 2024, a comprehensive search was performed across databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest (based on MeSH), as well as the Persian databases such as Magiran, Noormags, and the Scientific Information Database. A total of 1998 studies were initially retrieved. After removing duplicates and screening the records, 27 studies were ultimately selected for inclusion. The extracted data were summarized, synthesized, and categorized based on the study objectives. Results: The findings were organized into four main categories, ten subcategories, and 66 codes. The main categories included individual factors (e.g., personality traits and professional characteristics), organizational factors (e.g., management style, regulations, and facilities), professional factors (e.g., nature and importance of research), and environmental factors (e.g., interaction and collaboration, rewards and recognition, and institutional values). Conclusions: Policymakers and academic administrators should prioritize enhancing the key factors that influence research vitality across individual, organizational, professional, and environmental domains. Addressing these dimensions can foster greater motivation, creativity, and productivity, among faculty members, ultimately contributing to the improvement of research quality in medical universities.
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.