MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4410509934 · doi:10.22605/rrh9626

An integrative review of new nurse practitionersâ experiences in rural healthcare practice

2025· review· en· W4410509934 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Candace Stidolph, Jennifer Kawi, Catherine E Dingley, Ann Marie Hart, Jarod T. Giger, Rebecca D. Benfield, Andrew Thomas Reyes

Notice bibliographique

RevueRural and Remote Health · 2025
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueNursing Roles and Practices
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNursingHealth careMedicinePsychologyPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: A maldistributed primary care workforce and disparities in health outcomes are ongoing concerns for rural populations across the globe. Nurse practitioners (NPs) are a promising solution for mitigating rural healthcare inequities by reducing provider shortages and improving access to essential primary care services. The NP workforce is the fastest growing sector of primary care providers in the US. NPs are more likely than their physician colleagues to spend careers in rural and underserved settings practicing in isolation from other providers, with higher rates of turnover. An indistinct understanding of rural NPs' early career experiences highlights the need for a critical synthesis of the literature and key future recommendations. This integrative review aimed to analyze and synthesize various types of empirical reports and theoretical articles about new NPs' experiences in rural primary healthcare practice; identify current literature gaps; and discuss implications for education, policy, and further research. METHODS: Whittemore and Knafl's integrative method was used to inform the selection, review, and analysis of the literature. Search keywords were based on the Population, Effect of Interest, Measure, Study Design, Setting framework: (1) population (primary care NPs), (2) effect of interest (early career phase in a rural context), (3) measure (NP perspectives about their experiences), (4) study design (empirical, theoretical), and (5) setting (rural US and countries with a similar healthcare system and NP workforce, such as Australia, Canada, Ireland, Netherlands, and New Zealand). Four key databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and CINAHL) were searched, followed by manual searching of reference lists to identify relevant empirical and theoretical literature; no time delimitation was applied in the search. A total of 174 sources were scanned. Data were iteratively compared, and significant patterns were extracted and organized into thematic clusters. RESULTS: The literature search yielded five studies that met the eligibility criteria: three phenomenological studies, one descriptive qualitative study, and one descriptive quantitative study. Three themes emerged: the trajectory of early career practice for rural NPs, commitment and persistence of new rural NPs, and adaptive and maladaptive early career factors for rural NPs. CONCLUSION: This review included articles published in the US, although emergent themes may contribute to global knowledge about early career experiences in rural settings where advanced practice nurses are used. This review reinforced that NPs as a distinct professional population are underrepresented in rural workforce research, particularly during their early career phases. Scholarly literature about new rural NPs emphasized clinical preparedness and competence, workplace recruitment incentives, transition-to-practice experiences, and the importance of mentoring and professional networks. However, findings are limited primarily to the first year of practice. Future research priorities include exploring the ways to support rural NPs' wellbeing during the transition-to-practice phase, the barriers and facilitators to their job satisfaction by career stage, and factors contributing to burnout and turnover. Further exploration of community contexts and adaptive processes are indicated to inform meaningful NP educational refinements and effective retention policies. Understanding the experiences of rural NPs who are newcomers to rural life should also be explored.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,762
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,071
Tête enseignante GPT0,540
Écart entre enseignants0,470 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeAutre devis
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueRural and Remote HealthMême sujetNursing Roles and PracticesTravaux en français237 207