目的：运用meta分析的方法探讨实习护生自我效能感在性别、城乡、学历和是否独生子女方面的差异。方法：通过检索和筛选文献，共纳入18篇文献，使用Review Manager5.3软件进行统计分析。结果：本科实习护生自我效能感方面的得分明显高于中专实习护生(Z = 3.14, P = 0.002)，大专实习护生自我效能感方面的得分明显高于中专实习护生(Z = 2.09, P = 0.04)。但是实习护生自我效能感在性别方面的得分差异不显著(Z = 0.99, P = 0.32)，实习护生自我效能感在城乡方面的得分差异不显著(Z = 1.33, P = 0.18)，实习护生自我效能感在是否独生子女方面的得分差异不显著(Z = 0.69, P = 0.49)，实习护生自我效能感在本科学历和大专学历方面的得分差异不显著(Z = 1.70, P = 0.09)。结论：实习护生自我效能感中，本科实习护生和大专实习护生自我效能感方面的得分均明显高于中专实习护生；性别、城乡、是否是独生子女方面没有显著差异；性别差异中，由于学护理的男生较少，而且收集到的样本量有限，与女生的样本量相比存在很大的出入，数据可能存在偏倚，需要进一步证实。
Objective: The meta-analysis method was used to explore the differences of self-efficacy among intern nurses in gender, urban and rural areas, educational background and whether they were only children or not. Methods: By searching and screening literature, a total of 18 articles were included. Review Manager5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Results: The scores of self-efficacy of undergraduate nursing students were significantly higher than those of secondary vocational nursing students (Z = 3.14, P = 0.002). The scores of self-efficacy of college interns were significantly higher than those of secondary vocational interns (Z = 2.09, P = 0.04). However, there was no significant difference in the scores of self-efficacy between male and female interns (Z = 0.99, P = 0.32). There was no significant difference in self-efficacy between urban and rural nursing students (Z = 1.33, P = 0.18). There was no significant difference in self-efficacy between interns and only-child nurses (Z = 0.69, P = 0.49). There was no significant difference in self-efficacy scores between undergraduate and tertiary nursing students (Z = 1.70, P = 0.09). Conclusion: Among interns’ self-efficacy, the scores of undergraduate interns and college interns in self-efficacy were significantly higher than those of secondary vocational interns. There were no significant differences in gender, urban and rural areas, and whether they were only children. Among the gender differences, because there are fewer boys who study nursing and the sample size collected is limited, there is a big discrepancy between the sample size of girls and boys. The data may be biased, which needs further confirmation.
