IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/nuhsci/v18y2016i2p246-255.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New Brunswick nurses' views on nursing research, and factors influencing their research activities in clinical practice

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvie Robichaud‐Ekstrand

Abstract

New Brunswick became the first province in Canada to require a baccalaureate degree in nursing as the entry to practice, yet nursing research in hospital settings remains quite low. This study examined clinical nurses' views on nursing research, and identified some contributing factors to the research‐practice gap. This descriptive, cross‐sectional multicenter study involved 1081 nurses working in the Francophone Regional Health Authority in New Brunswick, Canada. Nurses were eager to identify nursing‐care problems to improve patient care (92.9%), and to be involved in collecting data for nursing research studies (95.2%). However, without research supervision, few had engaged in basic research activities, such as formulating or refining research questions (24.5%), presenting at research conferences (6.9%), or changing their practice based on research findings (27.2%). Younger, more educated nurses, nurse managers, and educators participated more readily in research. Sharing research and clinical expertise, as well as infrastructures between academic and clinical institutions is the key to enduring successful patient‐centered nursing research in clinical settings. Concrete actions are proposed to build clinical nursing research.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvie Robichaud‐Ekstrand, 2016. "New Brunswick nurses' views on nursing research, and factors influencing their research activities in clinical practice," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 246-255, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:18:y:2016:i:2:p:246-255
    DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12261
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12261
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/nhs.12261?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Louise O’Byrne & Sheree Smith, 2011. "Models to enhance research capacity and capability in clinical nurses: a narrative review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(9‐10), pages 1365-1371, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Natalie Bradford & Shirley Chambers & Adrienne Hudson & Jacqui Jauncey‐Cooke & Robyn Penny & Carol Windsor & Patsy Yates, 2019. "Evaluation frameworks in health services: An integrative review of use, attributes and elements," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(13-14), pages 2486-2498, July.
    2. Qirong Chen & Dan Liu & Chuyi Zhou & Siyuan Tang, 2020. "Relationship between critical thinking disposition and research competence among clinical nurses: A cross‐sectional study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1332-1340, April.
    3. Lona Roll & Kristin Stegenga & Verna Hendricks-Ferguson & Yvonne J. Barnes & Brooke Cherven & Sharron L. Docherty & Sheri L. Robb & Joan E. Haase, 2013. "Engaging Nurses in Research for a Randomized Clinical Trial of a Behavioral Health Intervention," Nursing Research and Practice, Hindawi, vol. 2013, pages 1-6, September.
    4. Arja Häggman‐Laitila & Lea‐Riitta Mattila & Hanna‐Leena Melender, 2017. "A systematic review of the outcomes of educational interventions relevant to nurses with simultaneous strategies for guideline implementation," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3-4), pages 320-340, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:18:y:2016:i:2:p:246-255. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1442-2018 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.