ReviewInternational journal of nursing practice2026
Examining the Effectiveness of Typologies of Violence Used in Predicting and Responding to Workplace Violence Against Nurses: A Rapid Review.
Review in International journal of nursing practice, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rate of violence against nurses far exceeds what should be reasonably accepted and suggests this is an issue that requires targeted intervention. Typologies have been used to predict violence, but there is a gap in the literature on antecedent and precipitating factors that lead to violence against nurses.
aimThe aims were to (1) identify typologies of workplace violence used in nursing literature, (2) evaluate evidence for their effectiveness in predicting escalation and/or guiding responses and (3) synthesise antecedent and precipitating factors absent from existing typologies.
designThis article utilises a rapid review methodological framework, with emphasis on thematic construction to present current typologies of violence. DATA SOURCES: A search of academic literature was carried out in ProQuest Central, EBSCO and Web of Science databases. REVIEW
methodsArticles were limited to English-language peer-reviewed studies published between 2017 and 2022. Two-stage screening (title/abstract then full text) was undertaken independently by three authors, with disagreements resolved through discussion. Data were extracted on typology use, evidence of predictive/response utility and reported antecedent and precipitating factors. Forty-four studies were included, with 26 studies directly informing the present evidence synthesis.
resultsAcross incident-focused studies, typologies were used mainly for descriptive classification of perpetrators or settings, with minimal evaluation of predictive validity or response tailoring. Nurses consistently reported antecedent organisational conditions (e.g., staffing, crowding and safety culture) and precipitating interactional cues (e.g., agitation, escalating tone and perceived delays) that shaped both escalation risk and effective responses but were weakly represented in prevailing typologies.
conclusionExisting typologies help identify likely perpetrators of workplace violence but remain insufficient as stand-alone tools for real-time prediction and response because they omit escalation dynamics. This review contributes an integrative framework linking typology categories to antecedent and precipitating factors nurses can recognise and target.
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.