The quality of clinician and student quality improvement reports: An analysis of 8 years of submissions

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING Journal of Nursing Scholarship Pub Date : 2024-06-28 DOI:10.1111/jnu.13003
Maureen (Shawn) Kennedy MA, RN, FAAN, Jane Barnsteiner PhD, RN, FAAN
{"title":"The quality of clinician and student quality improvement reports: An analysis of 8 years of submissions","authors":"Maureen (Shawn) Kennedy MA, RN, FAAN,&nbsp;Jane Barnsteiner PhD, RN, FAAN","doi":"10.1111/jnu.13003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Many papers reporting on QI projects are not publishable for a variety of reasons. We compared manuscripts submitted as QI reports between June 2014 and June 2016 (prior to publication of the revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 2.0) with papers submitted to the <i>American Journal of Nursing</i> between July 2016 and December 2022). The aim was to evaluate any changes in the quality of manuscripts and identify problems that led to rejection; we also compared the quality of students with non-student submissions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a non-randomized descriptive study to evaluate 349 papers submitted as QI project reports between June 2014 and December 2022 using screening templates based on the SQUIRE 2.0 checklist and findings of the INANE Working Group on Student Papers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Manuscripts designated as QI reports accepted for publication increased from 4% during 2014–2016 (T1) to 14% during 2016–2022 (T2); one student submission was accepted. There was a slight decrease in submissions designated as QI that were not QI: 36% of student submissions during T1 and 31% of student submissions during T2. Among clinician submissions, 44% in T1 designated as QI reports were not QI versus 31% submitted during T2<i>.</i> There was a decrease in student submissions that followed the SQUIRE guidelines (36% during T1 to 24% during T2).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Findings demonstrate that by following the SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines, authors submit more complete manuscripts with fewer missing components. However, there are still misconceptions about what constitutes QI versus research and how to report QI initiatives. After comparing the findings from both periods, it is noteworthy that there is essentially the same level of inaccuracy and lack of acceptable manuscripts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Clinical Relevance</h3>\n \n <p>Sharing findings from QI activities through presentations and publications is a vital way of helping spread the learnings from these projects and improve health care for a wider audience. Clinicians, academicians, and students must understand the elements of the SQUIRE guidelines and ensure that this framework is used for both designing and submitting QI projects for publication.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51091,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nursing Scholarship","volume":"56 6","pages":"836-842"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nursing Scholarship","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jnu.13003","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Many papers reporting on QI projects are not publishable for a variety of reasons. We compared manuscripts submitted as QI reports between June 2014 and June 2016 (prior to publication of the revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 2.0) with papers submitted to the American Journal of Nursing between July 2016 and December 2022). The aim was to evaluate any changes in the quality of manuscripts and identify problems that led to rejection; we also compared the quality of students with non-student submissions.

Methods

We conducted a non-randomized descriptive study to evaluate 349 papers submitted as QI project reports between June 2014 and December 2022 using screening templates based on the SQUIRE 2.0 checklist and findings of the INANE Working Group on Student Papers.

Results

Manuscripts designated as QI reports accepted for publication increased from 4% during 2014–2016 (T1) to 14% during 2016–2022 (T2); one student submission was accepted. There was a slight decrease in submissions designated as QI that were not QI: 36% of student submissions during T1 and 31% of student submissions during T2. Among clinician submissions, 44% in T1 designated as QI reports were not QI versus 31% submitted during T2. There was a decrease in student submissions that followed the SQUIRE guidelines (36% during T1 to 24% during T2).

Conclusions

Findings demonstrate that by following the SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines, authors submit more complete manuscripts with fewer missing components. However, there are still misconceptions about what constitutes QI versus research and how to report QI initiatives. After comparing the findings from both periods, it is noteworthy that there is essentially the same level of inaccuracy and lack of acceptable manuscripts.

Clinical Relevance

Sharing findings from QI activities through presentations and publications is a vital way of helping spread the learnings from these projects and improve health care for a wider audience. Clinicians, academicians, and students must understand the elements of the SQUIRE guidelines and ensure that this framework is used for both designing and submitting QI projects for publication.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床医生和学生质量改进报告的质量:对 8 年来所提交报告的分析。
导言:由于各种原因,许多报告质量改进项目的论文无法发表。我们比较了 2014 年 6 月至 2016 年 6 月(《卓越质量改进报告标准》(SQUIRE 2.0)修订版出版之前)作为质量改进报告提交的稿件,以及 2016 年 7 月至 2022 年 12 月期间提交给《美国护理学杂志》的论文。目的是评估稿件质量的任何变化,找出导致退稿的问题;我们还比较了学生与非学生投稿的质量:我们进行了一项非随机描述性研究,使用基于SQUIRE 2.0检查表的筛选模板和INANE学生论文工作组的研究结果,对2014年6月至2022年12月期间作为QI项目报告提交的349篇论文进行了评估:被指定为QI报告的稿件被接受发表的比例从2014-2016年(T1)的4%增加到2016-2022年(T2)的14%;有一篇学生投稿被接受。被指定为 "QI "而非 "QI "的稿件略有减少:T1期间学生稿件占36%,T2期间学生稿件占31%。在临床医生提交的报告中,T1 阶段有 44% 被指定为 QI 报告,而 T2 阶段有 31% 不是 QI 报告。遵循 SQUIRE 指南提交的学生报告有所减少(T1 期为 36%,T2 期为 24%):研究结果表明,通过遵循 SQUIRE 2.0 指南,作者提交的稿件更加完整,缺失部分更少。然而,对于什么是 QI 与研究以及如何报告 QI 计划,人们仍然存在误解。在比较了两个时期的调查结果后,值得注意的是,不准确和缺乏可接受稿件的情况基本相同:临床相关性:通过演讲和出版物分享质量创新活动的研究成果,是帮助传播这些项目的学习成果、为更广泛的受众改善医疗服务的重要途径。临床医生、学者和学生必须了解 SQUIRE 指南的要素,并确保在设计和提交 QI 项目供发表时使用这一框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
85
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: This widely read and respected journal features peer-reviewed, thought-provoking articles representing research by some of the world’s leading nurse researchers. Reaching health professionals, faculty and students in 103 countries, the Journal of Nursing Scholarship is focused on health of people throughout the world. It is the official journal of Sigma Theta Tau International and it reflects the society’s dedication to providing the tools necessary to improve nursing care around the world.
期刊最新文献
Low-value and high-value care recommendations in nursing: A systematic assessment of clinical practice guidelines. Issue Information Missed nursing care: Expanding the research scope for a comprehensive understanding. Response to a Letter to the Editor on "The Role of Nurses' Adherence to Clinical Safety Guidelines in Linking Nurse Practice Environment to Missed Nursing Care". Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic surgery: A meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1