The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The clinical learning environment in nursing education: a concept analysis
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to report an analysis of the clinical learning environment concept. Background: Nursing students are evaluated in clinical learning environments where skills and knowledge are applied to patient care. These environments affect achievement of learning outcomes, and have an impact on preparation for practice and student satisfaction with the nursing profession. Providing clarity of this concept for nursing education will assist in identifying antecedents, attributes and consequences affecting student transition to practice. Design: The clinical learning environment was investigated using Walker and Avant's concept analysis method. Data sources: A literature search was conducted using WorldCat, MEDLINE and CINAHL databases using the keywords clinical learning environment, clinical environment and clinical education. Articles reviewed were written in English and published in peer‐reviewed journals between 1995–2014. Methods: All data were analysed for recurring themes and terms to determine possible antecedents, attributes and consequences of this concept. Results: The clinical learning environment contains four attribute characteristics affecting student learning experiences. These include: (1) the physical space; (2) psychosocial and interaction factors; (3) the organizational culture and (4) teaching and learning components. These attributes often determine achievement of learning outcomes and student self‐confidence. Conclusion: With better understanding of attributes comprising the clinical learning environment, nursing education programmes and healthcare agencies can collaborate to create meaningful clinical experiences and enhance student preparation for the professional nurse role.
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
Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x018001032 · Cited by 13,645
Cited by
Effectiveness of virtual reality in nursing education: meta-analysis
Chen, F.-Q., Leng, Y.-F., Ge, J.-F., Wang, D.-W., Li, C., Chen, B., & Sun, Z.-L. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/18290 · Cited by 535
Simulation in Clinical Nursing Education
Koukourikos, K., Tsaloglidou, A., Kourkouta, L., Papathanasiou, I., Iliadis, C., Fratzana, A., & Panagiotou, A. (2021) · Acta Informatica Medica · doi:10.5455/aim.2021.29.15-20 · Cited by 466
Stress levels of nursing students: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Zheng, Y.-X., Jiao, J.-R., & Hao, W.-N. (2022) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000030547 · Cited by 92
What attributes guide best practice for effective feedback? A scoping review
Ossenberg, C., Henderson, A., & Mitchell, M. (2019) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-018-9854-x · Cited by 60
Høegh-Larsen, A. M., Gonzalez, M. T., Reierson, I. Å., Husebø, S. I. E., & Ravik, M. (2022) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105592 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Flott, E. A., & Linden, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Advanced Nursing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-12-09
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 501-513
- ISSN
- 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2648
- OpenAlex
- W2193781670
- Cited by
- 421
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 38.55
- 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: The clinical learning environment in nursing education: a concept analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/jan.12861
- The paper
- Flott, E. A., & Linden, L. (2016). The clinical learning environment in nursing education: a concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12861
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.