For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
4
views
88
references
 Top references
cited by
5
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      467
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Nursing research priorities based on CINAHL database: A scoping review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          To analyse nursing research based on the CINAHL database to identify research priorities for nursing.

          Design

          A scoping literature review was conducted. The CINAHL Plus (EBSCO) Full Text was searched between 2012–2018.

          Methods

          Out of 1522 original publications, 91 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools were applied. Data were analysed by a thematic analysis method.

          Results

          A strong emphasis should be put on development and evaluation of nursing theories and, in addition, randomized controlled trial studies, meta‐synthesis, experimental and intervention studies are needed in nursing research. Development of competencies and skills in the nursing profession ought to be studied more extensively and research should be focused on variety fields of nursing practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references88

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews.

          Micah D.J. Peters, Christina M Godfrey, Hanan Khalil … (2015)
          Reviews of primary research are becoming more common as evidence-based practice gains recognition as the benchmark for care, and the number of, and access to, primary research sources has grown. One of the newer review types is the 'scoping review'. In general, scoping reviews are commonly used for 'reconnaissance' - to clarify working definitions and conceptual boundaries of a topic or field. Scoping reviews are therefore particularly useful when a body of literature has not yet been comprehensively reviewed, or exhibits a complex or heterogeneous nature not amenable to a more precise systematic review of the evidence. While scoping reviews may be conducted to determine the value and probable scope of a full systematic review, they may also be undertaken as exercises in and of themselves to summarize and disseminate research findings, to identify research gaps, and to make recommendations for the future research. This article briefly introduces the reader to scoping reviews, how they are different to systematic reviews, and why they might be conducted. The methodology and guidance for the conduct of systematic scoping reviews outlined below was developed by members of the Joanna Briggs Institute and members of five Joanna Briggs Collaborating Centres.
          Article 0 comments Cited 1903 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Cochrane Update. 'Scoping the scope' of a cochrane review.

            Rebecca Armstrong, Belinda Hall, Jodie Doyle … (2011)
            Article 0 comments Cited 336 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              International survey of nursing home research priorities.

              John E. Morley, Gideon A Caplan, Matteo Cesari … (2014)
              This article reports the findings of a policy survey designed to establish research priorities to inform future research strategy and advance nursing home practice. The survey was administered in 2 rounds during 2013, and involved a combination of open questions and ranking exercises to move toward consensus on the research priorities. A key finding was the prioritization of research to underpin the care of people with cognitive impairment/dementia and of the management of the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia within the nursing home. Other important areas were end-of-life care, nutrition, polypharmacy, and developing new approaches to putting evidence-based practices into routine practice in nursing homes. It explores possible innovative educational approaches, reasons why best practices are difficult to implement, and challenges faced in developing high-quality nursing home research.
              Article 0 comments Cited 36 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Hanna Hopia:
                ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6480-875X
                hanna.hopia@jamk.fi
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Nurs Open
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Nurs Open
                Journal ID (doi): 10.1002/(ISSN)2054-1058
                Journal ID (publisher-id): NOP2
                Title: Nursing Open
                Publisher: John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                ISSN (Electronic): 2054-1058
                Publication date (Electronic): 26 December 2019
                Publication date Collection: March 2020
                Volume: 7
                Issue: 2 ( doiID: 10.1002/nop2.v7.2 )
                Pages: 483-494
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] School of Health and Social Studies JAMK University of Applied Sciences Jyvaskyla Finland
                [ 2 ] School of Health and Social Studies JAMK University of Applied Sciences, Research and Development Jyvaskyla Finland
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Hanna Hopia, School of Health and Social Studies, JAMK University of Applied Sciences, PL 207, FI–40100 Jyvaskyla, Finland.

                Email: hanna.hopia@ 123456jamk.fi

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6480-875X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8255-3618
                Article
                Publisher ID: NOP2428
                DOI: 10.1002/nop2.428
                PMC ID: 7024619
                PubMed ID: 32089844
                SO-VID: 15563d35-8296-4624-a46d-c4d3223932db
                Copyright © © 2019 The Authors. Nursing Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
                License:

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Date received : 23 June 2019
                Date revision received : 18 October 2019
                Date accepted : 15 November 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 3, Pages: 12, Words: 10127
                Categories
                Subject: Review Article
                Subject: Review Articles
                Custom metadata
                source-schema-version-number 2.0
                cover-date March 2020
                details-of-publishers-convertor Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.7.5 mode:remove_FC converted:16.02.2020

                Keywords: clinical nursing research,nursing research,nursing research priorities,scoping review,thematic analyses
                Data availability:
                Keywords: clinical nursing research, nursing research, nursing research priorities, scoping review, thematic analyses

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content467

                See all similar

                Cited by5

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors1,411

                See all reference authors