| Course | NUR 602 State of the Science in Nursing and Healthcare Innovation |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Evidence table with narrative notes |
| Length | About 685 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | PhD in Nursing and Healthcare Innovation |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 602 Module 2
Ten Studies, Eight Columns: An Evidence Table on Registered Nurse Staffing and Hospital Mortality, 2016 to 2023
Student Name
Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University
NUR 602: State of the Science in Nursing and Healthcare Innovation
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Ten Studies, Eight Columns: An Evidence Table on Registered Nurse Staffing and Hospital Mortality, 2016 to 2023
Evidence Table
| Citation | Purpose | Design | Setting and sample | Staffing measure | Outcomes | Key findings | Strengths and limitations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Griffiths et al. (2016) | Assess evidence on staffing and outcomes for national guidance | Review and discussion paper | Studies reviewed for UK safe staffing guidance | Various RN staffing measures | Mortality and other nurse-sensitive outcomes | Consistent association between higher RN staffing and better outcomes; causal evidence limited | Broad scope; mostly cross-sectional evidence; few thresholds identified |
| Aiken et al. (2017) | Examine skill mix and outcomes | Cross-sectional | Adult general acute hospitals in six European countries | Proportion of professional nurses in the nursing workforce | Mortality, patient ratings, quality | Lower professional nurse share associated with higher odds of death and worse ratings | Large multinational sample; cannot establish causation |
| Ball et al. (2018) | Examine missed care as a link between staffing and mortality | Cross-sectional | Surgical patients in hospitals across nine countries | Patients per RN; missed care reports | 30-day post-operative mortality | Higher patient loads and more missed care associated with higher mortality | Explores mechanism; self-reported missed care |
| Driscoll et al. (2018) | Pool evidence on ratios in specialist units | Systematic review and meta-analysis | Acute specialist units such as intensive and cardiac care | Nurse-to-patient ratios | Mortality and nurse-sensitive outcomes | Richer ratios associated with lower mortality and fewer adverse outcomes | Pooled estimates; heterogeneity across units and measures |
| Griffiths et al. (2019) | Relate daily staffing exposure to mortality | Retrospective longitudinal cohort | Admissions to an English hospital trust | Daily RN and assistant hours relative to the ward mean | In-hospital mortality | Each day of RN staffing below the mean raised the hazard of death; more assistant staff did not offset it | Patient-level exposure; single trust |
| Musy et al. (2021) | Examine staffing at shift level | Retrospective longitudinal | Inpatients at a Swiss university hospital | Shift-level nurse staffing relative to target | Inpatient mortality | Exposure to understaffed shifts associated with higher mortality | Fine-grained measure; one center |
| McHugh et al. (2021) | Evaluate ratio legislation | Prospective panel study | Public hospitals in Queensland, Australia, with comparison hospitals | Patients per nurse before and after mandated minimums | Mortality, readmissions, length of stay | Staffing improved after legislation, with lower mortality and readmissions and shorter stays | Natural experiment with comparison group; observational |
| Lasater et al. (2021) | Estimate effects of proposed legislation | Observational, with projections | Hospitals in Illinois | Patients per nurse | Mortality, length of stay, costs | Richer staffing associated with fewer deaths and cost savings under a proposed standard | Policy relevance; projections rest on observed associations |
| Dall'Ora et al. (2022) | Synthesize longitudinal evidence | Systematic review | Longitudinal studies of hospital staffing | RN staffing measures over time | Mortality and other outcomes | Higher RN staffing associated with lower mortality across longitudinal designs | Stronger designs; varied measures limit pooling |
| Zaranko et al. (2023) | Relate staffing to mortality nationally | Retrospective longitudinal | Adult inpatients across English NHS trusts | Registered nurse staffing per patient | Inpatient mortality | Higher RN staffing associated with lower mortality | National scope; observational |
Notes on the Table
Designs: Four studies are longitudinal, two are cross-sectional, one is a prospective policy evaluation, one combines observation and projection and two are reviews. The longitudinal studies measure staffing exposure at the patient, shift or day level, which reduces confounding between hospitals and strengthens the case for a causal link (Dall'Ora et al., 2022).
Measures: Staffing was measured as patients per nurse, nursing hours relative to a ward mean, skill mix and shift-level deviation from target. These differences make pooling difficult and explain why reviews describe consistent direction rather than a single effect size (Griffiths et al., 2016).
Findings: All ten point the same way, with more registered nurse staffing linked to fewer deaths. Two studies suggest mechanisms or conditions: missed care as a pathway (Ball et al., 2018) and the inability of assistant staff to substitute for registered nurses (Aiken et al., 2017; Griffiths et al., 2019).
Policy: The legislative studies show that mandated minimums can raise staffing and coincide with better outcomes (McHugh et al., 2021; Lasater et al., 2021).
Gaps: Few studies are from the United States outside policy analyses, and none examine rural or small hospitals, a gap the manuscript will address.
References
Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D., Griffiths, P., Rafferty, A. M., Bruyneel, L., McHugh, M., Maier, C. B., Moreno-Casbas, T., Ball, J. E., Ausserhofer, D., & Sermeus, W. (2017). Nursing skill mix in European hospitals: Cross-sectional study of the association with mortality, patient ratings, and quality of care. BMJ Quality & Safety, 26(7), 559-568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005567
Ball, J. E., Bruyneel, L., Aiken, L. H., Sermeus, W., Sloane, D. M., Rafferty, A. M., Lindqvist, R., Tishelman, C., & Griffiths, P. (2018). Post-operative mortality, missed care and nurse staffing in nine countries: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 78, 10-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.08.004
Dall'Ora, C., Saville, C., Rubbo, B., Turner, L., Jones, J., & Griffiths, P. (2022). Nurse staffing levels and patient outcomes: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 134, Article 104311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104311
Driscoll, A., Grant, M. J., Carroll, D., Dalton, S., Deaton, C., Jones, I., Lehwaldt, D., McKee, G., Munyombwe, T., & Astin, F. (2018). The effect of nurse-to-patient ratios on nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in acute specialist units: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 17(1), 6-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515117721561
Griffiths, P., Ball, J., Drennan, J., Dall'Ora, C., Jones, J., Maruotti, A., Pope, C., Recio Saucedo, A., & Simon, M. (2016). Nurse staffing and patient outcomes: Strengths and limitations of the evidence to inform policy and practice. A review and discussion paper based on evidence reviewed for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Safe Staffing guideline development. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 63, 213-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.03.012
Griffiths, P., Maruotti, A., Recio Saucedo, A., Redfern, O. C., Ball, J. E., Briggs, J., Dall'Ora, C., Schmidt, P. E., & Smith, G. B. (2019). Nurse staffing, nursing assistants and hospital mortality: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study. BMJ Quality & Safety, 28(8), 609-617. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008043
Lasater, K. B., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D., French, R., Martin, B., Alexander, M., & McHugh, M. D. (2021). Patient outcomes and cost savings associated with hospital safe nurse staffing legislation: An observational study. BMJ Open, 11(12), Article e052899. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052899
McHugh, M. D., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., Windsor, C., Douglas, C., & Yates, P. (2021). Effects of nurse-to-patient ratio legislation on nurse staffing and patient mortality, readmissions, and length of stay: A prospective study in a panel of hospitals. The Lancet, 397(10288), 1905-1913. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00768-6
Musy, S. N., Endrich, O., Leichtle, A. B., Griffiths, P., Nakas, C. T., & Simon, M. (2021). The association between nurse staffing and inpatient mortality: A shift-level retrospective longitudinal study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 120, Article 103950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2021.103950
Zaranko, B., Sanford, N. J., Kelly, E., Rafferty, A. M., Bird, J., Mercuri, L., Sigsworth, J., Wells, M., & Propper, C. (2023). Nurse staffing and inpatient mortality in the English National Health Service: A retrospective longitudinal study. BMJ Quality & Safety, 32(5), 254-263. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2022-015291
NUR 602 Module 2 instructions, in plain terms
The evidence table is worth 15% of the NUR 602 grade and is also drafted earlier for peer and professor review. The syllabus sets clear minimums: each study meeting your search criteria appears in its own row, the matrix has at least eight columns, and the table includes at least ten studies representing the strongest and most relevant literature from the previous ten years. The table later becomes part of the final manuscript, so its columns should support the synthesis you plan to write. Choose columns that let you compare studies on the features that matter for your question, such as design, sample, how the key variable was measured, outcomes and findings, rather than columns that only repeat bibliographic details.
How the NUR 602 Module 2 example is put together
Ten rows and eight columns make up the table, meeting both minimums. Columns run from citation and purpose through design, setting and sample, the staffing measure, outcomes and key findings to strengths and limitations, so every study is described on the same terms. Findings are stated in plain directional language, with no invented precision. Notes after the table compare the studies across designs, measures and findings, point out the mechanisms two studies suggest and the policy evidence from two others and name the gap the review will pursue. A margin note explains why a consistent column structure matters. The references match the table rows exactly.
NUR 602 Module 2 rubric: what earns full marks
Fifteen percent of the grade goes to the evidence table, under criteria posted in Canvas. Tables at this level are usually credited for meeting the minimums of ten studies and eight columns, for including the strongest and most recent relevant evidence, for accurate and consistent extraction across rows, for columns that serve the review question and for appraisal of strengths and limitations. Tables lose credit when they include studies outside the search criteria or the ten-year window, when cells are inconsistent from row to row, when findings come from abstracts that the student never checked against the article and when the limitations column is generic. Notes that compare studies show readiness for the synthesis.
NUR 602 Module 2 help from the desk
Inconsistent extraction is the weakness faculty notice first: one row lists sample sizes and the next does not. Decide what each column holds and fill it the same way for every study. Read the full text rather than relying on abstracts, especially for how the key variable was measured. Keep findings faithful to what the study reports, using the authors' direction and qualifiers. Make the limitations column specific to each design. Check publication years against the ten-year window. Draft the table early so peer review can catch gaps. The desk can check your table's consistency if you share a draft. Note in each row whether you read the full text, so peer reviewers know what to verify.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More NUR 602 and PhD in Nursing and Healthcare Innovation sample papers
- NUR 602 Module 1: Reference List: PICO, Search Terms and Title and Abstract Review
- NUR 602 Module 3: Manuscript: Integrated Review of Nurse Staffing and Hospital Mortality
- NUR 602 Module 4: Poster Presentation: State of the Science on Nurse Staffing and Mortality
- NUR 601 Module 1: Role Paper: Trends in Nursing and Healthcare Innovation and My Future Role
- NUR 608 Module 2: Observation and Reflection Paper
- NUR 607 Module 1: WIN Evaluations: Summary, Critique and Application of Four Research Articles
- NUR 606 Module 1: Synthesis Paper: Mindset and My Program of Research
NUR 602 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NUR 602 Module 2 sample paper?
The whole NUR 602 Module 2 sample is above: ten staffing studies laid out across eight columns, followed by notes comparing them.
What are the requirements for the NUR 602 evidence table?
At least ten studies from the past ten years, each in its own row, in a matrix of at least eight columns.
What columns should a nursing evidence table include?
Common columns are citation, purpose, design, setting and sample, key measures, outcomes, findings and strengths and limitations.
How much is the NUR 602 evidence table worth?
It is worth 15% of the grade, and it is also included in the final manuscript.
Why do longitudinal staffing studies matter?
They measure each patient's exposure to staffing over time within the same hospitals, which reduces confounding and strengthens causal inference.