PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 8311432

Toward a nursing practice research method.

Abstract

This article promotes a structure for nursing research in which the primary feature is the nurse researcher-as-clinician in a collaborative relationship with the client-as-subject. Elements of a theoretical rationale for blending the roles of clinician and researcher in an essentially qualitative methodology are developed. A nursing practice research method is conceptualized not as merely a technical activity with a focus on narrative data, but also as an explicit recognition of research as practice with an emphasis on intersubjectivity and dialogue in the research process as constitutive of reality. Research and knowledge development are thus envisioned as taking place from within the nursing situation and contingent on the quality of the nurse-client relationship. The nurse and client are recognized as the authors of the nursing-research situation in which meanings of health experiences are explored and chosen, and opportunities for enhanced quality of life are presented to both. Nurse and client each lend a unique perspective in the shared nursing-research situation. Regardless of the facticities of the client's medical status, both nurse and client have the potential for positive growth and change when these unique perspectives of nurse and client are joined. The proposed nursing practice research methodology capitalizes on these features of the practice situation, and thus, speaks directly to the concerns of the clinician.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C O Boyd. 1993. Toward a nursing practice research method.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-199312000-00003

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review.

CONTEXT: Many computer software developers and vendors claim that their systems can directly improve clinical decisions. As for other health care interventions, such claims should be based on careful trials that assess their effects on clinical performance and, preferably, patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review controlled clinical trials assessing the effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) on physician performance and patient outcomes. DATA SOURCES: We updated earlier reviews covering 1974 to 1992 by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, INSPEC, SCISEARCH, and the Cochrane Library bibliographic databases from 1992 to March 1998. Reference lists and conference proceedings were reviewed and evaluators of CDSSs were contacted. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they involved the use of a CDSS in a clinical setting by a health care practitioner and assessed the effects of the system prospectively with a concurrent control. DATA EXTRACTION: The validity of each relevant study (scored from 0-10) was evaluated in duplicate. Data on setting, subjects, computer systems, and outcomes were abstracted and a power analysis was done on studies with negative findings. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 68 controlled trials met our criteria, 40 of which were published since 1992. Quality scores ranged from 2 to 10, with more recent trials rating higher (mean, 7.7) than earlier studies (mean, 6.4) (P<.001). Effects on physician performance were assessed in 65 studies and 43 found a benefit (66%). These included 9 of 15 studies on drug dosing systems, 1 of 5 studies on diagnostic aids, 14 of 19 preventive care systems, and 19 of 26 studies evaluating CDSSs for other medical care. Six of 14 studies assessing patient outcomes found a benefit. Of the remaining 8 studies, only 3 had a power of greater than 80% to detect a clinically important effect. CONCLUSIONS: Published studies of CDSSs are increasing rapidly, and their quality is improving. The CDSSs can enhance clinical performance for drug dosing, preventive care, and other aspects of medical care, but not convincingly for diagnosis. The effects of CDSSs on patient outcomes have been insufficiently studied.

Clinical Competence