ArticleNursing open2025
Do Jointly Appointed Nursing and Midwifery Clinical Academics Provide Benefits to Patients, Individual Joint Appointees, Academic Institutions and Health and Social Care Organisations? A Scoping Literature Review.
Article in Nursing open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis review aimed to assess the evidence of benefit from Nurses and Midwives' Clinical Academic (NMCA) appointments and establish the value of their contribution to the key stakeholders: patients, the individual joint appointees, academic institutions and health and social care organisations.
backgroundJointly appointed clinical academic posts for nurses and midwives are rare, making up less than 0.1% of the workforce in the UK.
designA scoping review.
methodsConducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Methodology for Scoping Reviews. DATA SOURCES: ProQuest, SCOPUS, MEDLINE Ovid, CINAHL Ultimate and British Library EThOS were searched for English-language publications from January 2013 to December 2023.
resultsThirteen papers met the inclusion criteria. Key themes were the introduction of effective care guidelines and interventions, shared decision-making in care and research, individual professional growth and development, motivation and job satisfaction, improved clinical-academic partnerships and research advancement.
conclusionThere is emerging evidence of significant benefits from clinical academic posts in nursing and midwifery; studies have generally been qualitative, focusing less on quantitative approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: This study demonstrates potential benefits to both the nursing/midwifery profession and patients, particularly regarding the generation of new knowledge and provision of quality care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.