ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Public Attitudes Towards Expanding the Role of Advanced Practice Nurses in Germany: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.
Article 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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Are practice nurse-led patient consultations acceptable for the general population in Germany? Results from a population-based survey.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- Motivations to Enter and Remain in Community Nursing: Implications for Workforce Sustainability.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess public support and predictors of favourable or unfavourable views towards expanding Advanced Practice Nurse (APN) roles in Germany.
designA quantitative, cross-sectional survey using Germany as a national case study.
methodsData came from the Politikpanel Deutschland, an online survey conducted 15-28 July 2024. After exclusions, 6733 respondents were included. Data were weighted by age, gender, federal state, and voting intention. Descriptive statistics, subgroup comparisons, and multinomial logistic regression were applied to analyse attitudes towards APNs, with results reported as average marginal effects and predicted probabilities.
resultsOverall, 52.8% of respondents supported expanding APN roles, 25% opposed, and the remainder were undecided. Support was stronger among younger, male, and highly educated respondents, and those open to digital health technologies. Support was lower in East Germany and the city-states Berlin and Bremen, while it was higher in the south-west and north. Political ideology strongly predicted attitudes: supporters of right-wing parties were more likely to oppose, whereas left-leaning voters were more supportive.
conclusionsPublic support for expanding APN roles in Germany is moderate but uneven across demographic, regional, and political cohorts. Younger individuals and those favouring digital health technologies may drive future acceptance, while political resistance and regional disparities remain barriers. IMPACT: This first, large-scale survey of German public attitudes towards APNs suggests that policymakers should (i) link APN role expansion with digital health innovations, (ii) address regional differences through tailored communication, and (iii) ensure that patients, physicians, and healthcare professionals perceive APN integration as enhancing, not diminishing primary care quality. Strengthening legal and educational frameworks and fostering collaboration between physicians and nurses will not only be essential to integrate APNs into Germany's healthcare system and, thereby, mitigate physician shortages, but also to foster public acceptance of APNs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: None. REPORTING
methodCROSS-checklist.
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.