MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4368359138 · doi:10.11124/jbies-22-00217

Nursing students’ experiences of a post-licensure practical nurse bridging program: a qualitative systematic review

2023· review· en· W4368359138 on OpenAlexaff
Rose McCloskey, Lisa Keeping‐Burke, Patricia Morris, Richelle Witherspoon, Holly Knight, Sara Cave

Bibliographic record

VenueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsHorizon Health NetworkUniversity of FrederictonUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLLicensureCritical appraisalBridging (networking)NursingChecklistQualitative researchCredibilityInclusion (mineral)MEDLINEMedical educationMedicineNursing shortagePsychologyBachelorNurse educationPsychological interventionAlternative medicinePolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize qualitative evidence on students' experiences of a post-licensure practical nurse to registered nurse bridging program. INTRODUCTION: A worldwide shortage of registered nurses has prompted governments and educational institutions to develop alternate pathways to nursing licensure. One strategy used to increase the supply of registered nurses is bridging programs. Such programs grant practical nurses academic credit for previous educational and practical experience, which allows them to complete a bachelor of nursing degree in a shorter length of time. Understanding the experience of students enrolled in bridging programs will help identify their specific needs and the educational support needed for them to successfully transition into the registered nurse role. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review considered qualitative studies that examined the experiences of practical nurses enrolled in bridging programs. METHODS: The literature search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ERIC. The search for unpublished articles included ProQuest Dissertations & Theses and GreyNet International. Studies published in English were included with no date limits applied to the searches. Papers were screened independently by 2 reviewers against the inclusion criteria. Papers that met the criteria were appraised using the JBI critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. Key findings were extracted from the included studies using a standardized tool and assigned a level of credibility. The review followed principles of meta-aggregation in line with the JBI approach. The final synthesized findings were graded according to the ConQual approach for establishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies, published between 1989 and 2020, were included in the review. A total of 83 findings were extracted and aggregated into 11 categories. From the 11 categories, 4 synthesized findings were developed and are summarized as: i) growth through professional advancement reflects that bridging students report personal growth and professional transformation when they return to school and study to become a registered nurse; ii) need for support indicates that bridging students recognize and appreciate a need to have positive support networks in their lives, mainly with their family, coworkers, and classmates; iii) expecting more reflects that, as adult learners with prior nursing experience, bridging students anticipate receiving more support from the educational institutions and higher levels of clinical expertise and competence amongst faculty than what is provided; and iv) finding balance indicates that bridging students struggle to balance and manage multiple roles and responsibilities in their lives as they return to school to study to become a registered nurse. CONCLUSION: The findings of this review highlight that, as adult learners with prior nursing experience, when post-licensure practical nurses return to study there is often a need to balance multiple roles and responsibilities. It is with the support of family, coworkers, classmates, and faculty that bridging students are able to manage competing personal and academic demands. While many bridging students express disappointment with some of the learning opportunities and/or faculty expertise associated with the nursing program, they ultimately achieve growth through both personal and professional advancement upon completing the program and becoming a registered nurse. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42021278408. SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT: A French-language version of the abstract of this review is available as Supplemental Digital Content [ http://links.lww.com/SRX/A10 ].

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.420 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBI Evidence SynthesisSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207