ReviewNursing inquiry2026
Tracing the Roots of Inquiry: A Historical Review of Nursing Research Through Professionalisation Theory.
Review 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.
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
Nursing research has developed unevenly across history, shaped by shifting institutional structures, professional aspirations and societal demands. Yet existing historical reviews have largely adopted descriptive approaches, while few have applied an explicit theoretical lens to explain why this unevenness persists. This paper addresses that gap by examining the historical development of nursing research through Greenwood's trait-based professionalisation framework. Drawing on a narrative historical review spanning seven chronological periods, the analysis reveals a recurring pattern of partial professionalisation; nursing has consistently generated specialised knowledge yet has struggled to secure organisational infrastructure to embed and control that knowledge within clinical practice. The historical analysis suggests that knowledge production alone within a profession does not guarantee epistemic control.
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.