Conectar
Limited literature has focused on people with cancers' preference for care providers in scenarios where trade-offs may have to be made.
To report the results of a comprehensive search and synthesis of discrete choice experiments or best-worst scaling studies (± willingness to pay estimates) in scenarios involving cancer nurses, with a focus on: (1) preferred care provider; and (2) relative importance of attributes of care provision for people with cancer.
A search was conducted across: CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EconLit, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, and Google Scholar for discrete choice experiments published between January and July 2025. Data were extracted and appraised by two authors. Results were narratively synthesised.
Of 461 studies screened, 11 were included, published in Australia (n = 3), UK (n = 3), and China (n = 5) including people with breast (n = 4), gastric (n = 4), prostate (n = 1), or mixed cancers (n = 2). In six studies exploring scenarios of follow-up care (i.e., survivorship/surveillance), cancer medical specialists were the preferred care provider, followed by cancer nurses, and then general practitioners. In four of the five studies of supportive care scenarios (i.e., diet and exercise advice, anxiety and depression screening), cancer nurses were the preferred care provider, followed by allied health professionals, then cancer medical specialists. The highest WTP estimate was $US226.15 for a medical specialist to provide follow-up care. For supportive care, the highest WTP was $US137.52 for a cancer nurse to provide diet-based lifestyle advice post-treatment for breast cancer.
Cancer nurses are highly valued by people with cancer, particularly for supportive care provision. Opportunities exist for an increase in cancer nurse specialists with expanded scope of practice, to support the preference of people with cancer to have cancer medical specialists, or cancer nurse specialists provide expert cancer follow-up care.
Employees of a cancer patient advocacy group were involved in the design of the study, interpretation of the data, and the preparation of the manuscript. No patients were involved in this work. However, this systematic review prioritized patient voices by including studies that reported on the preferences of people with cancer.
Although the majority of doctorally prepared nurses work in academia, a percentage choose clinical work. Knowledge about the contribution of doctorally prepared clinical nurses (DPCNs) is growing, but further exploration is required. This research explored the value that DPCNs provide to nursing practice and healthcare.
Using an interpretive descriptive approach, individual interviews were conducted with 18 DPCNs. Data was collected between 2021 and 2022. Reflexive thematic analysis informed the data analysis.
Five key mechanisms drive DPCNs' value: being a knowledge expert; an enhanced approach to practice; increased credibility/prestige of the doctorate; valuable conversations; and new opportunities and collaborations. Challenges to value contribution were also highlighted, including identity issues; negative external perceptions; fragmented mentorship; no post-doctoral pathway; and little recognition from nursing leaders.
Doctorally prepared clinical nurses bring significant value to nursing and healthcare through distinct mechanisms that should be nurtured and strengthened.
Doctorally prepared clinical nurses add important value to healthcare. However, these nurses are under-utilised and require support to enhance their value contribution.
Identifying the mechanisms driving value provides a unique opportunity to acknowledge, support and enhance the value provided by DPCNs. The research will be impactful for nurses considering doctoral study, nursing leaders and healthcare managers.
This research is reported following SRQR guidelines.
This study did not include patient or public involvement in its design, conduct or reporting.
This study explored perceptions of older adults racialised as Black on structural resilience across the life course.
A qualitative descriptive study.
Using purposive sampling, we recruited 15 Black adults aged 50 and older residing in Baltimore, Maryland, including individuals possessing historical or current knowledge of the community. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit participants' experiences with structural resources during childhood, adulthood and late adulthood. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis.
Of the 15 participants, three identified as male (20.0%) and 12 as female (80.0%), with an average age of 70.9 ± 8.2 years. The analysis identified nine categories of structural resilience, confirming its multifaceted and dynamic nature. Common categories present across all life stages included: Built environment, civic engagement, food and housing, healthcare, and social capital and cohesion. Life stage–specific categories included child and family services, educational supports, and workforce development supports during childhood and adulthood, and financial support during adulthood and late adulthood.
These categories were interdependent and spanned across life stages, illustrating the dynamic, cumulative and relational qualities of structural resilience. Furthermore, structural resources were identified as key to safeguarding, empowering and restorative responses to adversity.
These findings contribute to the development of a nuanced, life course–informed framework of structural resilience and highlight the need for ecological strategies that address structural forces shaping health and well-being, particularly among older adults racialised as Black.
This study was reported in accordance with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist.
No patient or public contribution.
To explore the lived experiences of intensive care nurses caring for patients with limited English proficiency.
A hermeneutic, interpretive phenomenological design was used.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with intensive care nurses recruited through purposive sampling. Data collection included Qualtrics screening surveys and semi-structured Zoom interviews. The research team, comprising linguistically diverse faculty and undergraduate research assistants, employed reflexivity techniques to minimise bias and enhance interpretive rigour. Data were analysed via inductive analysis using the hermeneutic circle.
Five main themes emerged organically from the data: Complications of Care Relating to Verbal Communication Challenges. Benefits and Barriers of Nursing Informatics in Linguistic Care. The Universal Language: Nursing Effort Builds Trust. The Ripple Effect: Chronological Considerations for Patient Care. Moving Forward: Where Do We Go From Here?
Based on these findings, a four-phase model was developed to guide individual and system-level interventions to reduce nurse moral distress and improve language equity in critical care.
Language barriers in the intensive care unit hinder communication, increase stress for patients and nurses, and impact care quality. While nurses' efforts to bridge these gaps are valued, systemic changes (such as expanded interpreter availability and improved cultural safety training) are necessary to support culturally, linguistically, and medically appropriate care.
Findings highlight the need for increased institutional support, additional resources for night-shift staff, and the integration of cultural humility education into intensive care training. The Limited English Proficiency Moral Distress Action Cycle for Critical Care Nursing, developed from this study, offers a flexible framework to guide the implementation of these improvements and reduce nurse moral distress. Future research should explore interventions to promote cultural and linguistic competence in multilingual patient populations.
Q: What problem did the study address?
A: The nurse-identified clinical, ethical, and workflow risks created when interpreters or translation tools are inadequate for critical care.
Q: What were the main findings?
A: Language barriers jeopardise teaching, informed consent, and symptom reporting. Video and phone interpreters or translation apps are vital but are often scarce, unreliable, or impersonal, particularly during night shifts. Nurses bridge these gaps by building trust through empathy, non-verbal communication, and learning key phrases. Yet, effective care for patients with limited English proficiency requires extra time, increasing workloads and fuelling moral distress related to language-discordant care. Nurses consistently called for 24/7 interpreter coverage; more reliable devices and cultural humility training must be implemented system-wide.
Q: Where and on whom will the research have an impact?
A: Findings can guide nurses, managers, leaders, and administrators to improve both language concordant and discordant nursing care and train nurses in cultural and linguistic competencies for a multilingual patient population. Ultimately, these efforts have been shown to improve the quality, outcomes, and cost-effectiveness of patient care. The study also identifies moral-distress triggers and introduces the Limited English Proficiency Moral Distress Action Cycle (LEP-MDAC). This model is proposed for use in other high-acuity settings worldwide that seek to provide language-concordant or language-discordant care effectively.
SRQR.
None.
FreshRSS