ArticleBMC medical education2026
Nursing students' first clinical encounters with delirium: a qualitative study of experiential learning and professional development.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
backgroundDelirium is a complex neurocognitive condition that is often difficult to recognise and manage in clinical practice. Although nursing students receive theoretical education about delirium during undergraduate training, they may feel inadequately prepared when encountering patients with delirium in real clinical settings, reflecting a persistent theory-practice gap in nursing education. This study aimed to explore nursing students' experiences of their first clinical encounters with patients experiencing delirium.
methodsThis qualitative descriptive study was conducted with 13 first-semester, fourth-year nursing students at a university in Türkiye who had recently completed delirium-related theoretical education and intensive care clinical placements. Participants were recruited using purposive sampling. Data were collected through face-to-face, semi-structured interviews and analysed using inductive reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsFive main themes were identified: (1) making sense of delirium through diagnostic uncertainty; (2) emotional burden, including fear, inadequacy, and empathy; (3) clinical and ethical challenges related to behavioural disturbances and restraint practices; (4) professional learning through role modelling, communication, and increasing self-efficacy; and (5) critical reflections on education, highlighting the limitations of theory-based preparation. Students described their first encounters with delirium as emotionally intense and clinically demanding experiences. Although students initially struggled with uncertainty, fear, and communication difficulties, repeated clinical exposure and supportive nurse role models contributed to the development of professional confidence, communication strategies, and more empathic approaches to delirium care. Students also reported that nurses' attitudes and approaches toward patients influenced their own professional perspectives on nursing care.
conclusionsNursing students' first encounters with delirium were experienced as both emotionally challenging and professionally transformative. The findings suggest that theoretical education alone may be insufficient to prepare students for the complexity of delirium care. Integrating experiential and practice-oriented educational approaches, such as simulation, case-based learning, and communication-focused training, may help bridge the theory-practice gap and improve students' preparedness, confidence, and competence in delirium 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.