Background During 2011-2013, women from a municipality in Denmark who were born in 1936, 1941, 1946 or 1951 were invited to cardiovascular screening (n = 1984); of those, ten nonattendees were interviewed about their perspectives on cardiovascular screening. The interviews were re-analysed to gain a deeper understanding of their motives for viewing screening as personally irrelevant. A salutogenic perspective formed the premise for the data analysis. Additional Files Additional le 1. This le contains the checklist 'The COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus group'.

The relation between leadership and burnout is complex, affected by situational factors of leadership and the ambiguous nature of burnout. Nurses of various ages, at different stages of career development and participating in different work tasks require different kinds of leadership.

The psychometric data suggest that a modified version of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire is a highly suitable instrument to measure multidimensional nursing leadership. Validity and reliability were supported. The results can be used in studies applying the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the factor structure of the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS) among Finnish nursing staff. Although the factorial validity of the MBI-HSS has been studied across different countries, the factor structure has never been investigated among Finnish nursing staff. The data were gathered by postal questionnaires from nursing staff working in health-care organizations around Finland. The sample consisted of 627 nurses and nurse managers. The factor structure was studied by using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. The fit of the hypothesized three-factor model to the data was superior to the alternative one-factor and two-factor models. The three-factor structure (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, reduced personal accomplishment) showed the best fit, while the internal consistencies of the subscales were satisfactory. The MBI-HSS is a highly suitable instrument for measuring burnout among nursing staff and it is very applicable to Finnish health-care research.

Aims: To identify current best evidence on the types of interventions that have been developed to improve job satisfaction among nurses and on the effectiveness of these interventions. Design:The systematic review is a quantitative systematic review and meta-analysis following a profile-likelihood random-effects model.

Despite major investment, health information technology (HIT) implementation often tends to fail. One of the reasons for HIT implementation failure is poor leadership in healthcare organisations, and thus, more research is needed on leaders' roles in HIT implementation. The aim of the review was to identify the role of healthcare leaders in HIT implementation. A scoping review with content analysis was conducted using a five-step framework defined by Arksey and O'Malley. Database searches were performed using CINAHL, Business Source Complete, ProQuest, Scopus and Web of Science. The included studies were written either in English or Finnish, published between 2000 and 2019, focused on HIT implementation and contained leadership insight given by various informants. In total, 16 studies were included. The roles of healthcare leaders were identified as supporter, change manager, advocate, project manager, manager, facilitator and champion. Identifying healthcare leaders' roles in HIT implementation may allow us to take a step closer to successful HIT implementation. Yet, it seems that healthcare leaders cannot fully realise these identified roles and their understanding of HIT needs enforcement. Also, healthcare leaders seem to need more support when actively participating in HIT implementation.

Confirmatory factor analysis is a good method to test the structure of theory, for example to test the concepts built by concept synthesis or analysis. Tested theories are needed to develop nursing science itself.

Despite the fact that systematic reviews are considered the most robust source of research evidence, they vary in methodological quality. This point is important to consider in clinical practice when applying the results to patient care.