| Course | NR 351 Foundational Concepts for the Practicing RN |
|---|---|
| Week | 6 |
| Paper type | Research article summary |
| Length | About 770 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | RN-to-BSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 351 Week 6
Summary of Aiken et al. (2014): Nurse Staffing, Nurse Education and Surgical Mortality in Nine European Countries
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 351: Foundational Concepts for the Practicing RN
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Summary of Aiken et al. (2014): Nurse Staffing, Nurse Education and Surgical Mortality in Nine European Countries
Purpose of the Article
Aiken et al. (2014) set out to determine whether two features of hospital nursing, the number of patients each nurse cares for and the proportion of nurses educated at the bachelor's level, were associated with the chance that surgical patients died within 30 days of admission. The study was part of a large European research program on the nursing workforce, and it was designed partly to inform policy decisions in Europe at a time when some countries were considering reductions in nurse staffing and debating the level of education required for nurses.
Method
The researchers used an observational design that combined two sources of data. The first was a survey of more than 26,000 nurses working in 300 hospitals in nine European countries: Belgium, England, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland. From the survey, the researchers calculated each hospital's average number of patients per nurse on the nurses' most recent shift and the percentage of nurses holding a bachelor's degree. The second source was hospital discharge data for more than 420,000 patients aged 50 years and older who had common general, orthopedic or vascular surgery in those hospitals. The outcome was death within 30 days of admission. The analysis adjusted for patient characteristics, such as age, sex and type of surgery, and for hospital characteristics, such as size, teaching status and technology, so that hospitals caring for sicker patients were not unfairly compared with others.
Findings
The study reported two main associations. After adjustment, every extra patient in a nurse's assignment went along with roughly 7 percent higher odds of death in the month after admission. In the other direction, for every additional ten percentage points of the nursing staff with a bachelor's degree, the odds of death fell by roughly 7 percent. The authors illustrated the combined size of these associations by comparing hypothetical hospitals: patients in hospitals where 60 percent of nurses held bachelor's degrees and nurses cared for an average of six patients would have almost 30 percent lower mortality than patients in hospitals where only 30 percent of nurses held bachelor's degrees and nurses cared for an average of eight patients.
The size of the associations varied from country to country in the data, and the hospitals differed widely in both staffing and education. The findings are associations measured at the hospital level; they do not describe what happened to individual nurses' patients.
The Authors' Conclusions
The authors concluded that reducing nurse staffing to save money could harm patients, and that increasing the proportion of nurses with bachelor's degrees could reduce preventable hospital deaths. They argued that these findings should inform European policy on nurse workforce planning and education, particularly where cost-cutting measures were being considered.
Limitations the Authors Acknowledged
The study was observational, so it could show that staffing and education were associated with mortality but could not prove that changing them would change mortality. Staffing was measured through nurses' reports of their last shift rather than through payroll records, although the authors noted that nurse reports have been shown to be reliable in earlier work. Mortality was taken from discharge data, which can vary in completeness between countries, and the study could not account for every difference among hospitals that might affect both staffing and patient outcomes. These limits do not cancel the findings, but they mean the study supports its conclusions as strong associations across many hospitals rather than as proof of cause.
Relevance to the Summarizer's Practice
The course asks for a brief note, kept separate from the summary, on why the article matters to the writer. The writer works on a surgical unit in the United States where patient loads of five or six per nurse are typical on day shift and six or seven at night, and where the hospital has recently begun preferring bachelor's-prepared nurses for new positions. The article does not settle whether those specific numbers are safe, because it studied European hospitals and hospital-level averages. What it offers is evidence that both workload and education are associated with surgical mortality across a very large sample, which gives the writer a scholarly basis for understanding why staffing and education requirements are debated rather than simply accepting or resenting them.
References
Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., Bruyneel, L., Van den Heede, K., Griffiths, P., Busse, R., Diomidous, M., Kinnunen, J., Kózka, M., Lesaffre, E., McHugh, M. D., Moreno-Casbas, M. T., Rafferty, A. M., Schwendimann, R., Scott, P. A., Tishelman, C., van Achterberg, T., & Sermeus, W. (2014). Nurse staffing and education and hospital mortality in nine European countries: A retrospective observational study. The Lancet, 383(9931), 1824-1830. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62631-8
NR 351 Week 6 instructions, in plain terms
Week 6 hands you one research article to condense into a summary. Count on supplying the purpose, the method, the main findings, the authors' conclusions, the limitations and, in a separate section, the article's relevance to your practice, all in your own words with APA citations. Paraphrase throughout, since most versions of this rubric limit or forbid quotation. Report findings as the authors reported them, keeping associations as associations. Keep any comparison or estimate attributed to the authors. Include the limitations, because a summary without them makes the study seem to prove more. Keep your own view out of the summary and in its own section.
How this NR 351 Week 6 example is built
The purpose section restates the study's aim in the writer's words. The method section describes the observational design: a survey of over 26,000 nurses in 300 hospitals in nine countries, linked to discharge data for surgical patients. The findings section reports that each extra patient per nurse was associated with roughly 7 percent higher odds of death in the month after admission, and that each ten-point rise in the share of bachelor's-educated nurses went with about 7 percent lower odds, noting that the associations were measured at hospital level. The conclusions section reports the authors' warning about cutting staff. The limitations section lists the observational design and the use of nurse reports. A separate section relates the findings to a surgical unit with loads of five or six.
NR 351 Week 6 rubric: what full points look like
Article summary rubrics typically give points for accurate purpose and method, faithful reporting of findings, the authors' conclusions, inclusion of limitations, paraphrasing, a separate relevance section and APA. Faithfulness carries the most weight, and this summary earns it by keeping associations from turning into causes. Paraphrase is credited because the summary contains no direct quotations while keeping the figures accurate. Limitations score when they appear as the authors acknowledged them. The relevance row is met by a section clearly marked off from the summary, so the writer's opinion does not mix with the findings. Method points come from naming the design, sample and data sources. One accurate reference with all authors listed completes APA.
NR 351 Week 6 help from the desk
The first loss on this summary is a document stitched together from quotations, which shows the article was read but not understood. The second is upgrading the findings, writing that staffing caused deaths when the study measured associations. Students also drop the limitations, mix their own opinions into the findings, or summarize the abstract instead of the full article. Statistics can be reported in plain words if you are careful, such as "higher odds" rather than an invented percentage of deaths. You do not have to agree with the article. If your assigned article is a different study, send it and an NR 351 summary can be drafted that keeps the findings faithful.
Get a NR 351 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 6 instructions and the article your section assigned, along with any length limit, and a custom example is written to that article and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. Reading the article is still worth doing yourself.
More NR 351 papers and RN-to-BSN samples
- NR 351 Week 1: Introduction and Return to Study Post
- NR 351 Week 2: APA Formatting Exercise Example
- NR 351 Week 3: Moral Courage Professional Paper
- NR 351 Week 4: Compassion Fatigue Bibliography
- NR 351 Week 5: Situational Awareness Concept Analysis
- NR 351 Week 7: Professional Development Plan
- NR 351 Week 8: Reflection
- NR 360 Week 6: Patient Teaching Handout
- NR 307A Week 6: Inclusive Communication Plan
- NR 361 Week 6: Health App Review
- NR 306 Week 6: Abdominal Exam Write-Up
NR 351 Week 6 questions, answered
How much quotation is acceptable?
Very little, and some sections allow none at all. The skill being graded is paraphrase, so a summary carrying several quotations usually loses marks even when every one is cited correctly. Where a phrase genuinely cannot be paraphrased without losing meaning, quote it, cite it with a page or paragraph number, and keep it short.
Do I have to agree with the article?
The summary itself takes no position, which is what makes it a summary. Where the assignment asks for a reaction or an application, that goes in its own section and can disagree freely. Mixing the two is the commonest structural error here, because a reader can no longer tell which statements came from the authors.
What if I do not understand the statistics?
Report what the authors say the numbers mean rather than interpreting them yourself, and say which outcomes moved and which did not. Undergraduate rubrics at this level rarely require statistical interpretation. What they do require is that you not overstate the result, and reporting the authors' own wording of a finding protects against that.
Where can I find a free NR 351 Week 6 sample paper?
This page has the complete Week 6 summary of Aiken and colleagues' 2014 study, from purpose and method to findings, conclusions, limitations and the separate relevance note, with the full reference.
Does the NR 351 Week 6 summary say staffing causes surgical deaths?
No. It reports associations measured at the hospital level, as the authors did, and explains that an observational study cannot prove that changing staffing would change mortality.