Orthopaedic nursing research priorities: a Delphi study.

S W Salmond

doi:10.1097/00006416-199403000-00006

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7854812

Orthopaedic nursing research priorities: a Delphi study.

S W Salmond

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Research has been an integral component of the mission of the National Association of Orthopaedic Nurses. Operationalization of this component of the mission has included a national research committee, funding of research grants, offering of educational sessions that highlight research methodology as well as research findings, and the formalization of a research editor position within Orthopaedic Nursing. The National Center for Nursing Research has recognized that the individual specialty nursing organizations have a role to play in determining priorities for that specialty. Consequently, NAON has been queried as to its research emphasis. This article presents the study conducted by NAON's Research Committee to determine research priorities within orthopaedic nursing.

Explore related subjects

Delphi Technique Health Priorities Humans Nursing Research Orthopedic Nursing Research Support as Topic Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

S W Salmond. Orthopaedic nursing research priorities: a Delphi study.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006416-199403000-00006

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2025

Results of a local modified Delphi consensus on use of plasma metagenomic next-generation sequencing.

Molecular tests without well-defined test performance characteristics are increasingly available for diagnosis of infectious diseases. These tests present a diagnostic stewardship challenge for institutions. We share the results of a local modified Delphi consensus undertaken to define appropriate scenarios for use of plasma metagenomic next-generation sequencing.

Delphi Technique↗

PubMed2007

Can we achieve international agreement on terminologies and definitions used to describe abnormalities of menstrual bleeding?

BACKGROUND: There is considerable worldwide confusion in the use of terminologies and definitions around the symptom of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), and these are leading increasingly to difficulties in setting up multinational clinical trials and in interpreting the results of studies undertaken in single centres. An international initiative was established to develop an agreement process to recommend clear, simple terminologies and definitions with the potential for wide acceptance. METHODS: After widespread consultation with relevant international and national organizations, journal editors and individuals, a modified Delphi process was developed to assess the current use of terminologies followed by a structured face-to-face meeting of 35 clinicians (mostly gynaecologists) and scientists in Washington. Focused small group discussions led to plenary assessment of concepts and recommendations using an electronic keypad voting system. RESULTS: There was almost universal agreement that poorly defined terms of classical origin used in differing ways in the English medical language should be discarded and that these should be replaced by simple, descriptive terms with clear definitions which have the potential to be understood by health professional and patient alike and which can be translated into most languages. The major recommendations were to replace terms such as menorrhagia, metrorrhagia, hypermenorrhoea and dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Suggestions for potentially suitable replacement terms and definitions are made. CONCLUSIONS: A simple terminology has been recommended for the description and definition of symptoms and signs of AUB. This manuscript should be a living document and should be part of an ongoing process with international medical and community debate. Classification of causes, investigations and cultural and quality of life issues should be part of the ongoing process.

Delphi Technique↗

PubMed2006

Reporting data on homeopathic treatments (RedHot): a supplement to CONSORT*.

When homeopathy is tested in clinical trials, understanding and appraisal are likely to be improved if published reports contain details of prescribing strategies and treatments. An international Delphi panel was convened to develop consensus guidelines for reporting homeopathic methods and treatments. The panel agreed 28 treatment- and provider-specific items that supplement the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement items 2, 3, 4 and 19. The authors recommend these for adoption by authors and journals when reporting trials of homeopathy.

Delphi Technique↗