Facilitators of Nurse Practitioners’ Transition to Practice: An Integrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To review the literature and identify the facilitators that help new graduate nurse practitioners (NP) transition to practice. Background: The NP profession originated in the United States in the 1960s and followed in the same decade by Canada. Although the NP profession has existed for more than 50 years, struggles still exist in their full implementation to the health care system. These challenges include recruitment and retention, healthcare setting support, role clarity, public awareness, legislation and regulation, and funding. Focusing on retention, NPs have double the amount of turnover in comparison to their physician counterparts. This high turnover rate is often attributed to the challenges NPs face during their transition to practice as new graduates. Methods: An integrative literature review guided by the framework proposed by Whittemore and Knafl. Data sources included: CINAHL, Medline, and Web of Science. Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria and were assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Findings from the studies were obtained and analyzed using themes. Findings: Five themes were identified: (1) fellowship or orientation/onboarding programs, (2) mentorship, (3) prior registered nurse experience, (4) autonomous practice, and (5) communities of practice. This review revealed the complexity and interconnection of facilitators to transition. Conclusion: The NP role continues to expand globally; it is imperative that facilitators to transition are implemented to improve NP retention and address the education to practice gap.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".