ArticleBMC nursing2026
Mentors' perspectives on multidisciplinary in situ simulation teaching for new nurses: a qualitative SWOT analysis in a top-tier hospital in Central China.
Article in BMC nursing, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of mentors’ experiences with ISS in a top-tier hospital, to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) across the preparation, implementation, and feedback phases, and to provide practical recommendations for optimizing ISS practice.
methodsA qualitative phenomenological approach was adopted. Using purposive sampling, 25 clinical nurse mentors who had participated in multidisciplinary ISS were recruited. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and data were analyzed using Colaizzi’s seven-step phenomenological method. The SWOT framework was used to organize and present the themes across the preparation, implementation, and feedback phases of ISS.
resultsA total of 12 themes were identified across three stages. During the preparation phase, the themes included: (1) Strengths—structured preparation and formation of role identity; (2) Weaknesses—insufficient theoretical preparation and inadequate training mechanisms; (3) Opportunities—organizational empowerment and institutional support; and (4) Threats—tension between educational commitment and resource constraints. During the implementation phase, the themes comprised: (1) Strengths—the synergistic effect of immersive scenarios and reflective mechanisms; (2) Weaknesses—discrepancy between role expectations and teaching reality; (3) Opportunities—fostering learner collaboration and organizational momentum; and (4) Threats—conflicts between real-life settings and teaching order. During the feedback phase, the themes included: (1) Strengths—dual enhancement of positive feedback and teaching confidence; (2) Weaknesses—immediate feedback versus lack of long-term follow-up; (3) Opportunities—integration of technological tools and strengthening of instructional facilitation; and (4) Threats—resource depletion and increased role burden.
conclusionsISS promotes continuous self-reflection and professional development among nurse mentors, while supporting the integration of teaching into clinical practice. To improve ISS implementation, nursing education programs should prioritize pre-teaching preparation, allocate resources effectively, standardize debriefing procedures, and establish long-term evaluation systems. These strategies may help normalize ISS as a sustainable and high-impact component of nursing education. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.