The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Transition shock: the initial stage of role adaptation for newly graduated Registered Nurses
Abstract
Title. Transition shock: the initial stage of role adaptation for newly graduated Registered Nurses. Aim. The aim of this paper is to provide a theoretical framework of the initial role transition for newly graduated nurses to assist managers, educators and seasoned practitioners to support and facilitate this professional adjustment appropriately. Background. The theory of Transition Shock presented here builds on Kramer’s work by outlining how the contemporary new graduate engaging in a professional practice role for the first time is confronted with a broad range and scope of physical, intellectual, emotional, developmental and sociocultural changes that are expressions of, and mitigating factors within the experience of transition. Data sources. This paper offers cumulative knowledge gained from a programme of research spanning the last 10 years and four qualitative studies on new graduate transition. Discussion. New nurses often identify their initial professional adjustment in terms of the feelings of anxiety, insecurity, inadequacy and instability it produces. The Transition Shock© theory offered focuses on the aspects of the new graduate’s roles, responsibilities, relationship and knowledge that both mediate the intensity and duration of the transition experience and qualify the early stage of professional role transition for the new nursing graduate. Conclusion. Transition shock reinforces the need for preparatory theory about role transition for senior nursing students and the critical importance of bridging undergraduate educational curricula with escalating workplace expectations. The goal of such knowledge is the successful integration of new nursing professionals into the stressful and highly dynamic context of professional practice.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
‘Clear as Mud’: Toward Greater Clarity in Generic Qualitative Research
Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J. (2003) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/160940690300200201 · Cited by 1,256
Finding the Findings in Qualitative Studies
Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2002) · Journal of Nursing Scholarship · doi:10.1111/j.1547-5069.2002.00213.x · Cited by 468
Cited by
Brewer, C. S., Kovner, C. T., Greene, W., Tukov‐Shuser, M., & Djukic, M. (2012) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05753.x · Cited by 303
Rudman, A., & Gustavsson, J. P. (2012) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.03.010 · Cited by 268
The Key Job Demands and Resources of Nursing Staff: An Integrative Review of Reviews
Broetje, S., Jenny, G. J., & Bauer, G. F. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00084 · Cited by 257
Rudman, A., & Gustavsson, J. P. (2011) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.07.012 · Cited by 232
Exploring new graduate nurse confidence in interprofessional collaboration: A mixed methods study
Pfaff, K. A., Baxter, P. E., Jack, S. M., & Ploeg, J. (2014) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.01.001 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Duchscher, J. E. B.
- Venue
- Journal of Advanced Nursing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-04
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1103-1113
- ISSN
- 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2648
- OpenAlex
- W2162378199
- Cited by
- 1,095
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 44.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Transition shock: the initial stage of role adaptation for newly graduated Registered Nurses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04898.x
- The paper
- Duchscher, J. E. B. (2009). Transition shock: the initial stage of role adaptation for newly graduated Registered Nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04898.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.