MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The migration and transitioning experiences of internationally educated nurses: a global perspective

2011· review· en· W1808602598 on OpenAlexafffund
Stacey Newton, Jennifer Pillay, Gina Higginbottom

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Management · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDeskillingCredentialingCINAHLNursingMedicinePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To comprehensively review recent literature related to the migration and transitioning experiences of internationally educated nurses (IENs). BACKGROUND: Many developed nations are redressing nursing deficits by recruiting IENs. Acquiring credentialing is historically recognized as a barrier to obtaining meaningful employment, yet broader issues of transition into global health care contexts are also significant. METHODS: A database search of CINAHL, Medline, Scopus and Web of Science, and a hand-search of key nursing journals produced 239 combined hits, with 21 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Five common themes were extracted and synthesized including: (1) reasons for and challenges with immigration, (2) cultural displacement, (3) credentialing difficulties and 'deskilling', (4) discriminatory experiences and (5) strategies of IENs which smoothed transition. CONCLUSIONS: Although major reasons for migration are related to improved income and professional stature, these have overwhelmingly shown to erode upon relocation. Cultural displacement appears to largely stem from communication and language differences, feelings of being an outsider and differences in nursing practice. The deskilling process and discrimination are also key players which hinder transition and demoralize many IENs. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The present study highlights that the huge advantages in professional skill and cultural diversity that IENs can bring to any nursing unit will not be fully realized without substantial efforts to reduce practice limitations (deskilling) and discrimination. Individual strategies for easing the transition should be taught to IENs, probably through mentorship by experienced IENs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.415 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations133
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing ManagementSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207