| Theme 1. The intergenerational nursing workforce |
| Blythe et al., Canada; 2008(18)
|
| Objective: to perform an exploratory analysis to determine if nurses of different ages had different attitudes toward their work. |
| Design: mixed methodology study. |
| Data collection method: surveys and focal groups. |
| Sample: n = 1,396. 96.2% were women. |
| Quality score: 33 |
| Crowther and Kemp. Australia; 2009(29)
|
| Objective: to determine how attitudes of nurses from rural mental health differ over generations. |
| Design: descriptive study. |
| Data collection method: surveys by year of birth. |
| Sample: n = 89.4 were Veterans, 52 Baby Boomers, 17 X generation, and 5 Y generation. |
| Quality score: 36 |
| Hisel. USA; 2020(27)
|
| Objective: to examine the level of job commitment among Veteran, Baby Boom, X Generation, and Millennial nurses. |
| Design: quantitative causal comparative design. |
| Data collection method: surveys through a social network platform to measure their level of job commitment. |
| Sample: n = 1,885. 92% were women. |
| Quality score: 36 |
| Hu et al., USA; 2004(12)
|
| Objective: to help management nurses to maximize departmental effectiveness by capitalizing the unique characteristics of the multigenerational nursing staff. |
| Design: descriptive design. |
| Data collection method: surveys. |
| Sample: n = 62; 90,3% were women. |
| Quality score: 35 |
| MacDonnell and Buck- Fadyen. Canada; 2017(30)
|
| Objective: to explore the critical influences that determine the meanings, practices, and impacts of nursing activism. |
| Design: qualitative exploratory study, comparative study of life story that uses a feminist lens. |
| Data collection method: interviews and focal groups. |
| Sample: n = 40. X generation = 8, Y generation = 9, Baby Boomers = 20, and Veterans = 3. 87.5% were women. |
| Quality score: 33 |
| Sullivan et al., USA; 2013(13)
|
| Objective: to describe the job commitment of nursing professionals, identify generational predictors, present the implications for nursing managers, and suggest future research. |
| Design: descriptive study. |
| Data collection method: non-experimental surveys. |
| Sample: n = 747 |
| Quality score: 36 |
| Welcher. USA; 2011(9)
|
| Objective: to explore generational conflicts related with four generations working together and the values, beliefs and attitudes of each generation in local hospitals in Georgia. |
| Design: qualitative phenomenological study using the Van Kaam method modified by Moustakas (1994) |
| Data collection method: interviews. |
| Sample: n = 20 |
| Quality score: 35 |
| Theme 2. Recruiting and retaining an intergenerational workforce |
| Steinkuehler. USA; 2009(53)
|
| Objective: to review related literature and conduct an exploratory research on the organizational attraction of multigenerational nursing cohorts in the health industry. |
| Design: Descriptive correlation study. |
| Data collection method: surveys. Questionnaires that focus on a computer-generated random stratified sample of nurses. |
| Sample: n = 1100. 250 veterans, 250 Baby Boomers, 300 X generation, and 300 Y generation participants. |
| Quality score: 35 |
| Tourangeau et al., Canada; 2015(44)
|
| Objective: to describe the characteristics of the work of nursing professors and determine if generational differences exist. |
| Design: descriptive study. |
| Data collection method: Phase I used focal groups. Phase II developed and used a survey. |
| Sample: n = 650 |
| Quality score: 34 |
| Theme 3. Tutoring within an intergenerational nursing workforce |
| Earle et al., Canada; 2011(49)
|
| Objective: to discuss an integrative review of the literature. |
| Design: mixed-method study. |
| Data collection method: integrative review methodology de Whittemore and Knafl (2005). |
| Sample: n = 13,188. 18 articles |
| Quality score: 33 |