Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42189933›Full record

ArticleNursing inquiry2026

Flight Forward or Rational Adaptation? Nurse Prescribing Through Herbert Simon's The Sciences of the Artificial.

José Miguel Seguro, Hugo Neves

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing inquiry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

José Miguel SeguroHealth Sciences Research Unit: Nursing (UICISA: E), Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4543-6839
Hugo NevesHealth Sciences Research Unit: Nursing (UICISA: E), Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6843-6228

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The expansion of prescribing authority to nurses is no longer debated on safety grounds. But a quieter anxiety remains: does prescribing change what nursing is? This paper uses Herbert Simon's The Sciences of the Artificial (1996) to move beyond the stalemate between two narratives: prescribing as rational adaptation to systemic complexity, or as defensive flight from the devaluation of relational work. Simon's concepts of inner and outer environment, satisficing and artefacts allow us to see the prescription as a human-made tool. Its impact on professional identity depends on how well nursing's inner environment, comprising its knowledge, values and relational logic, is designed into the act. The paper makes three claims. First, diagnostic authority, rather than prescribing itself, is the deeper boundary crossing. Second, the rational-defensive binary can be resolved with four contingency criteria: systemic demand, role clarity, relational proximity and educational design. Third, there is no timeless nursing essence to protect; prescribing is an artefact, and its effects are a matter of design, not destiny. The paper ends with a focused research agenda, practical implications and an invitation to treat the prescription pad as a test of whether nursing will prescribe as nursing or as something else.

Indexed as

Drug PrescriptionsNurse's RoleHumansNon-Medical PrescribingartefactdiagnosisHerbert Simonnurse prescribingprofessional identityscope of practice

Identifiers

PMID42189933
PMCPMC13479770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.