ArticleScientific reports2026
Nursing research output and its influencing factors among registered nurses in Zhejiang Province of China.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nursing research plays an important role in advancing nursing science and improving the quality of care. This cross-sectional study surveyed 512 registered nurses (RNs) in Zhejiang Province, China, to collect their sociodemographic data and examine their research attitudes, capability, and output. Research capability was assessed using the Self-Evaluated Nursing Research Capacity Questionnaire, and research output was defined as publications or patents within the past five years. The results showed that while 86.7% of RNs recognized the importance of research and 62.1% were willing to participate, their median research capability score was 45 out of 120, and the majority (60.7%) had no research output in the past five years. Only 15.8% of RNs were currently involved in or preparing for research. Promotion was the primary motivation for research, whereas lack of knowledge and skills was the main barrier. Logistic regression analysis revealed that higher education level, longer work experience, advanced professional titles, and stronger research capability were significantly associated with greater research output. Due to convenience sampling and the geographic limitation of a developed region of eastern China, the generalizability of these findings warrants caution. Overall, RNs in Zhejiang demonstrated strong interest in research, but their capability and output remain limited. To enhance nurses' participation and contribution to research, hospital managers should create a supportive environment by providing systematic research training, opportunities for further education, and access to necessary resources, particularly for those with less experience and lower professional titles.
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.