ArticleBMC nursing2026
Nursing staff competence assessment instruments: a scoping review with implications for long-term care.
Article in BMC 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimCompetence assessment is essential for professional growth, workforce planning, and quality improvement in long-term care (LTC). However, the wide range of instruments, their limited differentiation based on various qualification levels, and the lack of standardized frameworks hinder effective use. This scoping review aimed to map international evidence on competence assessment instruments used in residential LTC nursing, broadening the scope to include acute care, community-based, and mixed-care settings to enhance the relevance and transferability of findings.
methodsA scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. Peer-reviewed and grey literature in English and German were searched across two databases (PubMed and CINAHL) between 2014 and 2024. Inclusion criteria focused on instruments assessing nursing competence through self-assessment or external evaluation, targeting various qualification levels and care contexts.
resultsTwenty instruments were identified. The review addressed two key research questions: (1) A wide range of self-assessment tools with generally sound psychometric properties were found, predominantly developed for registered nurses and validated in acute settings; however, few differentiated by qualification level, and no validated instruments were identified for healthcare assistants. (2) Validated peer or external evaluation instruments were scarce, highlighting a reliance on self-perception and a lack of objective assessment. Instruments for specialized domains (e.g., dementia, palliative care) demonstrated higher contextual relevance but lacked robust testing in LTC.
conclusionThis review highlights significant variability and identifies a crucial gap in tools available for healthcare assistants and multi-method assessments. Future efforts should focus on creating modular, theory-informed, and context-sensitive instruments that are validated across various qualification levels and care sectors. These tools are essential to support individualized learning, ensuring equitable staffing, and fostering sustainable quality improvements in long-term care.
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.