A systematic search for evaluated interventions to increase nursing students’ participation in international scientific conferences: an empty review and implementation implications

TL;DR

This review found no evaluated interventions to increase nursing students' participation in international scientific conferences, highlighting a need for further research and actionable strategies.

Contribution

The study identifies an evaluation gap and proposes implementation implications based on theory and routine indicators.

Findings

No eligible evaluative studies were identified in the systematic search.

The absence of evidence highlights a need for developing and evaluating interventions to boost participation.

Implementation strategies are suggested using behavior-change theory and iterative improvement cycles.

Abstract

International scientific conferences expose nursing students to current evidence, professional identity formation, and global networks, yet participation remains low. We aimed to identify evaluated interventions designed to increase nursing students’ participation in international scientific conferences.

Following PRISMA 2020, we searched PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science for English/Japanese records from January 2005 to 31 May 2025. We also examined three International Council of Nurses (ICN) Congress proceedings items authored by the research team as contextual sources. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts. Eligible studies targeted pre-licensure undergraduate nursing students and evaluated strategies intended to increase participation, reporting objective participation outcomes (e.g., abstract submission, registration, attendance, presentation).

Database searches identified 173 records. After removing 58 duplicates, 115 records were screened by title and abstract. All 115 records were excluded at the title/abstract stage; therefore, no eligible evaluative studies were identified (n = 0).

No evaluated interventions were identified. This empty review highlights an actionable evaluation gap. Informed by implementation and behavior-change theory and adjacent evidence, we outline implementation implications that can be adopted and monitored using routine indicators (key performance indicators) and iterative improvement cycles (Plan–Do–Study–Act).

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-026-08859-8.