ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Optimization and Implementation of a Primary Care Nurse Training Program Using an Action Research Framework.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the optimization and implementation of a primary care nurse training program using an action research framework. Methods: Guided by the theoretical principles of action research, three iterative cycles were conducted to address identified gaps among nurses working in primary care settings, with the aim of refining the training program. Program evaluation was performed using a satisfaction questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. Results: A needs-based training program for nurses in primary care settings was developed. Across the three action research cycles, mean participant satisfaction scores were 41.43 ± 11.829, 43.73 ± 10.784, and 46.12 ± 5.995, respectively. Welch's ANOVA demonstrated statistically significant differences among the cycles (F = 24.186, Conclusion: The action research approach facilitates problem identification and continuous iterative refinement of the training programme throughout the implementation process, thereby enhancing its relevance and practicality, as reflected in the increased satisfaction among primary care nurses. Future research should incorporate objective competency assessments to evaluate the actual effectiveness of the training programme in improving nursing competence.
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.