Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41877158›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2026

How are nurses' individual and their colleagues' diversity factors associated with their cooperation behaviors in teams? - Results of an online factorial survey.

Anna Schneider, Anna Maria Khouri, Lisa Peppler, Martin Feißt, Robert Roehle, Daniel Drewniak, Liane Schenk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anna SchneiderInstitute of Medical Sociology and Rehabilitation Science, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. anna.schneider@charite.de.
Anna Maria KhouriInstitute of Medical Sociology and Rehabilitation Science, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Lisa PepplerInstitute of Medical Sociology and Rehabilitation Science, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Martin FeißtMetaplan - Gesellschaft für Planung und Organisation mbH, Goethestraße 16, 25451, Quickborn, Germany.
Robert RoehleInstitute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Daniel DrewniakInstitute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Liane SchenkInstitute of Medical Sociology and Rehabilitation Science, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiversity within nursing teams in Germany increases due to staff shortages, nurse migration and the current academization of the profession. Little is known about how nurse’s own diversity factors and those of team members impact nurse’s perception and behavior in team situations. This study examines if and how nurses differentiate in the assessment of their colleagues’ nursing abilities in basic care, i.e. patient’s personal hygiene and treatment care, i.e. the set-up of an infusion, as well as their willingness to swap shifts with colleagues.

methodsA quasi-experimental, cross-sectional study with a factorial online survey with fictional case studies (vignettes) was conducted at two healthcare organizations in 2023 in a major city in Germany. Nurses ( > = 18 years) working in hospitals or nursing homes were eligible to participate. Associations of diversity factors, i.e., gender, age, migration background, and qualification, on the participant and vignette level on perceived competences and willingness to cooperate were analysed via multi-level fixed effects models.

resultsN = 684 nurses participated (76% female; mean age: 44.2 years; 88% born in Germany; 75% completed vocational training). Colleagues’ competency in patient’s personal hygiene was rated higher by respondents born in Germany (β = 0.42, p=.002; vs. foreign-born), when fictional colleagues were from Germany (β = 0.26, p<.001) or France (β = 0.09, p=.01; vs. China) and had completed vocational training (β = 0.06, p=.02; vs. a university degree). Competency in inserting infusions was rated higher by respondents born in Germany (β = 0.59, p=.002; vs. foreign-born), when fictional colleagues were from Germany (β = 0.33, p<.001) or France (β = 0.21, p<.001; vs. China) and when one worked together for months (β=-0.44, p<.001; vs. days). Willingness to swap shifts was affected by the length of collaboration (β=-0.09, p<.001) and their fictional colleagues’ age (β=-0.07, p=.02).

conclusionsHow nurses perceive their colleagues’ competences tended to be associated with their own and the other person’s migration background, while willingness to cooperate was affected by length of collaboration and colleagues’ age. However, limited generalizability of the findings applies due to our highly selective sample. Improving the onboarding process of new nurses in teams, and providing the time and space for professional exchange at work might improve mutual trust and teamwork in nursing. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

Indexed as

CooperationDiversityFactorial surveyNurseTeamVignette

Identifiers

PMID41877158
PMCPMC13063756

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.