ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Nurse Educators' Conceptions of How They Facilitate Critical Thinking in Bachelor Nursing Students: A Phenomenographic Study.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nurse Educators' Conceptions of How They Facilitate Critical Thinking in Bachelor Nursing Students: A Phenomenographic Study.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo describe the variation in nurse educators' conceptions of how they facilitate critical thinking in bachelor nursing students.
designQualitative study with a phenomenographic approach.
methodsData was collected through twenty-six semi-structured interviews with nurse educators conducted in Sweden between March and June 2024.
resultsThe result of this study can be understood as five descriptive categories: Creating a safe and trustful relationship with the students, Encouraging a dialogue with the students, Using space as a tool, Using artefacts as a tool, and Using oneself as a tool.
conclusionThe conclusion is that the facilitation of critical thinking needs to be based on a safe and trustful relationship between educators and students. Without this relationship, it is not possible to establish the central dialogue, where the educator can facilitate critical thinking through asking counterquestions and provoking the students. IMPLICATION FOR THE PROFESSION: To become critical thinkers, the students need to put their knowledge and assumptions in a new light and question them. Here, the educator has a vital role in being the guide and facilitator. IMPACT: The result indicated that it is vital for the educators to build a safe relationship with the students. The relationship is a precondition for the facilitative dialogue where the educators can ask reflective and provoking questions to stimulate critical thinking. Future nurses need to be prepared with critical thinking to enable evidence-based clinical decisions both during clinical practice as well as when being registered nurses. REPORTING
methodSRQR guidelines. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: This study did not include patient or public involvement in its design, conduct, or reporting.
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.