Cited by 117Mentoring and Academic DevelopmentStudent Stress and CopingNursing education and management

Effects of peer-mentoring on stress and anxiety levels of undergraduate nursing students: An integrative review

Kachaturoff, Melissa, Caboral-Stevens, Meriam, Gee, Michelle, Lan, Virginia M.·2020·Journal of Professional Nursing

Abstract

Background Nursing students, whether undergraduate or graduate, are at a higher risk for stress and anxiety due to competitiveness and complexities of nursing school. There is evidence in the literature on the effects of peer mentoring among nursing students. Peer mentoring has been associated with increased retention, student engagement, and skills competence among nursing students. There is, however, paucity in the literature about peer mentoring's effect on stress and anxiety levels of undergraduate nursing students.Purpose To examine the literature on the effect of peer mentoring on stress and anxiety levels among undergraduate nursing students.Theoretical framework Bandura's Self-Efficacy Theory was used to guide this review.Method An integrative review of the literature was conducted. Electronic databases searched included PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO, and ERIC using keywords: nurse*, student*, undergrad*, stress and nursing students, anxiety and nursing students, and mentor*. Review was limited to peer reviewed articles published in the English language from January 2000 to August 2018. Articles were independently reviewed by three authors, and the quality of data was evaluated using established criteria.Results Eight articles were included in the review. Review suggested that peer mentoring decreases stress, and situation or short-term anxiety levels of undergraduate nursing students. However, results should be interpreted with caution based on limited studies identified.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.profnurs.2019.12.007

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kachaturoff, M., Caboral-Stevens, M., Gee, M., & Lan, V. M.
Affiliations
Eastern Michigan University (US)
Corresponding author
Caboral-Stevens, Meriam
Venue
Journal of Professional Nursing
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-07
Volume
36
Issue
4
Pages
223-228
ISSN
  • 1532-8481 (ISSN-L)
  • 8755-7223
OpenAlex
W2994815493
Cited by
117
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 2
FWCI
8.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Professional Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mentoring and Academic Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing education and management
Keywords
peer mentoring, nursing students, undergraduate nursing education, stress, anxiety, self-efficacy, student retention, student engagement
MeSH terms
Mentoring, Anxiety, Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate, Humans, Mentors, Students, Nursing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review