Scoping review maps supervision structures and effectiveness in nursing bachelor's theses across Europe, highlighting challenges.
Aim To map and describe the literature on bachelor’s thesis supervision in undergraduate nursing within the European Higher Education Area, focusing on supervision structures, methods, content, effectiveness and efficiency. Background Bachelor’s theses are integral to European Higher Education Area (EHEA) nursing programs; supervision is resource-intensive and evidence on effectiveness and efficiency is limited. Increasing student numbers and emerging generative AI tools add supervisory complexities. Design A scoping review was conducted in accordance with JBI guidance and reported according to PRISMA-ScR. Methods Systematic searches of CINAHL, PubMed and ScienceDirect were conducted in May 2023 and updated through June 2026. Eligible publications were published from 2002 onward, in English or German, originated from European Higher Education Area countries and addressed bachelor’s theses in professionally qualifying undergraduate nursing programs. Findings were synthesized across five predefined analytical domains. Results The searches yielded 2,180 records; 45 publications were included. Thirty-three publications contributed findings to supervision structure, 22 to supervision methods, 18 to supervision content, 15 to supervision effectiveness and six to supervision efficiency. Only three publications reported objectively assessed effectiveness outcomes and one quantified changes in resource use. No included publication addressed AI-supported supervision. Conclusion Bachelor’s thesis supervision in undergraduate nursing is heterogeneous, with limited empirical evidence on effectiveness and efficiency and a notable absence of AI-supported approaches. Future research should evaluate supervision models—including AI-supported formats—using measurable outcomes to address workload and sustainability in supervision practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Korbel-Schindler et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: