Factors contributing to nursing leadership: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Leadership practices of health care managers can positively or negatively influence outcomes for organizations, providers and, ultimately, patients. Understanding the factors that contribute to nursing leadership is fundamental to ensuring a future supply of nursing leaders who can positively influence outcomes for health care providers and patients. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the multidisciplinary literature to examine the factors that contribute to nursing leadership and the effectiveness of educational interventions in developing leadership behaviours among nurses. METHODS: The search strategy began with 10 electronic databases (e.g. CINAHL, Medline). Published quantitative studies were included that examined the factors that contribute to leadership or the development of leadership behaviours in nurse leaders. Quality assessments, data extraction and analysis were completed on all included studies. RESULTS: A total of 27,717 titles/abstracts were screened resulting in 26 included manuscripts reporting on 24 studies. Twenty leadership factors were examined and categorized into four groups - behaviours and practices of individual leaders, traits and characteristics of individual leaders, influences of context and practice settings, and leader participation in educational activities. Specific behaviours and practices of individual leaders, such as taking on or practising leadership styles, skills and roles, were reported as significantly influencing leadership in eight studies. Traits and characteristics of individual leaders were examined in six studies with previous leadership experience (three studies) and education levels (two of three studies) having positive effects on observed leadership. Context and practice settings had a moderate influence on leadership effectiveness (three of five studies). Nine studies that examined participation in leadership development programs all reported significant positive influences on observed leadership. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that leadership can be developed through specific educational activities, and by modelling and practising leadership competencies. However, the relatively weak study designs provide limited evidence for specific factors that could increase the effectiveness of current nursing leadership or guide the identification of future nurse leaders. Robust theory and research on interventions to develop and promote viable nursing leadership for the future are needed to achieve the goal of developing healthy work environments for health care providers and optimizing care for patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".