Empowering Nurses through Continuous Professional Development: Insights from Various Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nurses need maintaining the highest level of expertise and knowledge in an ever-evolving healthcare environment through continuous professional development (CPD). Aim: This study examines nurses' attitudes, priorities, and challenges when it comes to continuing professional development, as well as their involvement and ambitions at their workplace. Methods: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study that was conducted on the affiliated health centres under the Eastern Health Cluster. The tool used is the "Questionnaire for Professional Development of Nurses (Q-PDN)". Results: The majority of the sample are female nurses (79.3%). A third (36.6%) of the study sample holds a bachelor's degree in nursing. Among the participants, (70.3%) have between 11 and 20 years of experience. Among study participants, (27%) hold managerial positions. Participants in continuous workplace-based educational interventions average 4.67 and deviate from the mean by 0.663. There is a good rank of involvement in continuous professional development activities. A number of factors inhibit healthcare professionals from participating in continuing professional development activities, including full employer reimbursement of expenses (Mean = 3.49), whereas supervisors providing necessary time (Mean = 2.58) had the least impact. Both managers and non-managers equally value CPD and encounter similar barriers to engagement; however, the only statistically significant difference lies in their job position and the types of CPD activities they participate in. Conclusion: This study found a high level of CPD engagement among nurses, particularly in in-service and recent formal training. However, financial constraints, limited access to CPD information, time pressures from family commitments, and resource shortages still hinder broader participation. Managerial nurses showed higher engagement in CPD events versus their non-managerial equivalents, reflecting greater access to training opportunities and institutional support.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".