ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Neurodivergence Among Nurses in the Workforce: A Scoping Review.
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. 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
aimTo identify and describe the current literature on neurodivergence in nursing and to identify existing gaps in knowledge.
designScoping review guided by Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review guidelines and PRISMA-Scoping Review framework.
methodsComprehensive search with inclusion following Participants, Concept, and Context framework: nurses or nursing workforce; neurodiversity or neurodivergence defined as autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia; workplace environment. Articles were screened and data extracted by independent reviewers. Dates of inclusion were 1999-2025. Data analysed through descriptive categorisation. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and PsycINFO (Ovid) were searched in April 2025, followed by reference mining and citation cross-referencing. Inclusion criteria were set for empirical studies, reviews, or textual evidence (expert opinions or narratives).
resultsTwenty-two sources met inclusion criteria. Most addressed dyslexia and neurodiversity. Sources described strengths of neurodivergent nurses (e.g., deep focus, relationality, novel perspectives), workable challenges (e.g., documentation and multitasking). Studies reported adaptations at multiple levels: individual, interpersonal, and intraprofessional, noting system influences of medical model framing and gender bias in diagnosis.
conclusionLiterature on neurodivergent nurses in the workplace is scarce. Neurodivergence offers strengths and challenges, yet ableism and limited research restrict well-being and professional advancement. IMPLICATIONS: Greater recognition of neurodivergence in nursing could enhance workforce retention, innovation, and inclusivity. Neurodivergent nurses' perspectives should inform research, workplace design, and professional development. IMPACT: What problem did the study address?: Limited research on neurodivergence in nursing despite growing awareness of neurodivergence generally and overall challenges in nursing retention and well-being. What were the main findings?: Literature encompasses empirical studies and textual evidence presenting strengths and challenges for nurses. Adaptation centered on the individual. Where and on whom will the research have an impact?: Researchers to increase empirical studies on neurodivergent nurses, including participatory methods; Leaders interested in workplace inclusion, sustainable workplaces, and professional innovation; Neurodivergent nurses and policy-makers concerned with workforce rights and healthcare resilience. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution.
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.