The first year as a nurse practitioner: An integrative literature review of the transition experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this integrative literature review was to synthesize current knowledge about the role transition from new graduate Nurse Practitioner (NP) to novice NP to increase our understanding of how to better support NP entry into practice. The NP role was implemented in the United States over fifty years ago and has proven to contribute to patient outcomes and reduced health care costs. Proper transition experience to advanced practice nursing is fundamental to these improved patient outcomes in the hospital setting. The transition from Registered Nurse to professional NP is an important and difficult adjustment to make and may affect ongoing NP practice. The following topics were reviewed: graduate NP to novice NP transition, NP perception of preparedness, and perceived challenges encountered during role transition. A search for relevant literature was conducted in the EBSCO Host and ProQuest databases and in the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, and MEDLINE specialty databases. Ten articles were identified and 3 major topic areas were revealed in the analysis: role transition, perception of preparedness, and perceived challenges. Establishing role identity as an NP, developing professional relationships, and having effective mentorship emerged as key issues influencing the transition process. Training programs are rare. A need exists for additional support and education for new hospital based NPs as they transition from students to practicing clinicians. Future studies that focus on the transition experience after internships programs may provide insight into how to develop or modify educational programs for NPs that will improve or enhance their transition to expert practitioner practice.
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 | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".