PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9354995

Nursing knowledge, theory and method revisited.

Abstract

With the approach of the 21st century, nursing is having to respond to diverse influences which are remoulding the professional landscape. Not least of these is the changing status of western economies which underpins a drive towards evidence-based practice and an increased emphasis on multidisciplinary approaches to health care delivery. Certainty in health care is now a thing of the past. Central to the way the nursing profession embraces the future is its underlying philosophy: that which articulates professional values and shapes practice, research, education and management. In a time of change it is therefore essential to revisit the philosophical framework which underpins nursing. The debate in nursing research and theory appears to have stressed the polarization of viewpoints. It may be the case that feminist writers, ethnographers, positivist researchers and nursing theorists, in defending their own points of view, diminish rather than enhance professional dialogue. This paper reviews the nature of this debate within nursing and considers the implications that a dichotomous position may have for knowledge, theory and research method within the current context of health care. It then suggests a philosophical framework which could be relevant and accessible across the whole spectrum of nursing activity. In so doing, the paper aims to contribute to the discussion around epistemology and method in a way which encompasses the diversity found within the broad church of nursing.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

K Booth, M Kenrick, S Woods. 1997. Nursing knowledge, theory and method revisited.. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.00353.x

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Health inequalities in Scotland and England: the contrasting journeys of ideas from research into policy.

Both the UK's Labour Government and Scotland's devolved Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition Executive have committed themselves to reducing health inequalities. Furthermore, both institutions have emphasised the importance of using evidence to inform policy responses. In light of such political commitments, a significant amount of work has been undertaken in the field of health inequalities in order to: (i) review the available research evidence; (ii) assess the extent to which policies have been based on this research evidence; and (iii) evaluate the success (or failure) of policies to tackle health inequalities. Yet so far only limited attention has been given to exploring how key actors involved in research-policy dialogues understand the processes involved. In an attempt to address this gap, this article draws on data from semi-structured interviews with 58 key actors in the field of health inequalities research and policymaking in the UK to argue that it is ideas, rather than research evidence, which have travelled from research into policy. The descriptions of the varying journeys of these ideas fit three types--successful, partial and fractured--each of which is outlined with reference to one example. The paper then employs existing theories about research-policy relations and the movement of ideas in an attempt to illuminate and better understand the contrasting journeys. In the concluding discussion, it is argued that the third approach, which focuses on the entrepreneurial processes involved in the marketing of ideas, is most helpful in understanding the research findings, but that this needs to be discussed in relation to the political context within which negotiations take place.

England↗