A quick outline of any general manuscript often includes an introduction in which the purpose or multiple aims are outlined. Following the introduction is the background section where it is expected that the authors would explore the comparative literature and identify where the gap exists in knowledge information. The methodology and results sections follow. Then the most critical segment of any manuscript, the discussion section, is revealed. This can be the most creative section to a manuscript, and for some, the most difficult to write. The discussion segment of any manuscript requires more thought and effort than any other manuscript component.1 As a writing consultant, I have found that writing the discussion section can be the most challenging task, for most authors, novice or otherwise. The most demanding aspect of framing a discussion section is deciding which aspects of the study are the most critical.1 The discussion section addresses the significant findings and must ensure that the manuscript's purpose has been fully accomplished.2-5 If within the initial paragraphs of the discussion it is unclear to the reader or reviewer, what the key outcomes or findings are, the purpose is then left unfulfilled, and the direction of the discussion can be further misdirected. The purpose of this manuscript is to outline for the reader the critical components needed to successfully complete the discussion section within any manuscript. Watson states that the discussion section is the heart of the entire manuscript.6 It pulls together the purpose, methods, the key results and then interprets the relevance of the key findings for the reader. One way to successfully accomplish this is to restate the purpose of the study within the first two sentences of the opening paragraph within the discussion. Then, the key findings follow which will likely complete the stated purpose of the manuscript. For any discussion section, it is helpful to build on what has already been presented in the existing literature within the background section of the manuscript.7 The background section identifies where the gap is within the literature justifying the writing and research of the present manuscript. One way in which to enhance the writing of the discussion section for novice writers (and a likely indicator of success), is to follow the style or components outlined within other published works.8 Commonly noted errors within the discussion section include the following: (a) repeating the results section over again, (b) addressing findings which were almost significant and then discussing those findings as if they were critical, and (c) documenting conclusions without supporting evidence or clear results, that is, overplaying the significance of the findings.8 Additional errors can include: the significance of the results not being fully discussed or supported, presenting unsupported conclusions, or having study limitations being inadequately covered.8 Within the discus
作者需要提出这样的问题:这项工作是建立在他人的工作基础上的，还是与该研究领域的其他人的工作有争议?在本小节中使用的关键短语可能包括:这些发现支持其他作者关于以下或使用该短语的过去工作，因为本研究的结果与支持以下结论的先前研究一致。所有这些起始句都为作者提供了阐述这些比较的机会。吸取的经验教训，然后指出哪些是有效的，哪些是无效的，这些都是讨论部分的附加子内容项。这两个组成部分通常建立在研究的基础上，并减少了其他类似研究的错误。作者可以识别未来的趋势以及未来的挑战。如果一个模型或范式被开发出来，其他作者如何能够利用它，另外，对未来的研究工作可以提出什么建议?其他子内容领域包括为实施研究结果而提出的建议和策略。换句话说，基于关键发现，可能会提出哪些创新建议，以及它们对未来有什么影响?政策决定可能对专业组织认可的实践产生什么影响?作者可以提出哪些具体的研究，可以在本研究的现有发现的基础上启动新的研究?这可以帮助未来的作者更深入地研究这个主题。从一项研究中产生的想法可以成倍地帮助创造新的研究兴趣。对于作者来说，解决这项研究的未来方向以及对读者来说关键的信息是什么是至关重要的。障碍和促进符是子内容分类描述符，通常可以帮助作者划分讨论部分的内容发现，并帮助为读者对内容进行分类。障碍和促进因素是为了加强作者在进行研究时如何解释什么有帮助，什么没有帮助。这些描述符为研究提供了更深入的视角或框架。通常，这些细节对未来的研究人员考虑相同的调查主题是有用的。作为完成讨论部分的检查表，作者必须提出关键的、宽泛的问题，以确保所有评论都已完全完成。表2提供了关键问题，作者可以使用这些问题来确定讨论部分的完整性。是否完全达到了目的，讨论部分是否为读者将论文联系在一起，这些发现的相关性是否得到了完整的解释，新的发现是否与比较文学相关联，其他人可以从这项研究中学到什么，从这项研究中展示了什么模型或范式，从研究结果中可以得出哪些具体建议?未来的趋势和挑战是什么?相对于国家或专业趋势，研究结果可以得出哪些价值或有用性?对于实践、研究或政策变化存在哪些具体推论或策略?如果适用，研究结果如何影响临床实践或科学的状态本研究中哪些有效，哪些无效是否有一个关键的关键信息从研究结果中填补了文献中的空白本研究机构提出的未来指示是什么最后，在阅读讨论部分后，许多编辑将重新审视其目的，看看它是否已经完全满足和完成，以及这些发现是否为现有文献添加了新的信息或对先前的发现提出了异议。这提供了一个最终的快照，该研究完成了最初在其既定目的中设定的目标。讨论部分可以分为子部分和子内容区域，这些区域很容易识别，并且对所有作者都是可行的。注意到讨论部分的关键功能和组成部分，并处理具体的、关键的内容细节，将完全完成任何手稿中最重要的部分。通过将内容按部分分解，并使用关键短语和提出问题，作者可以更成功地完成大多数手稿类型的讨论部分。作者声明无利益冲突。Diane J. Angelini:现任南卡罗来纳州查尔斯顿市南卡罗来纳医科大学护理学院写作顾问和临床教授。她是《围产期和新生儿护理杂志》的联合创始人和围产期名誉编辑，也是布朗大学沃伦·阿尔珀特医学院妇产科(临床)名誉教授。数据共享不适用于本文，因为本研究没有创建或分析新的数据。
{"title":"Delving into the critical components of the discussion section","authors":"Diane J. Angelini","doi":"10.1111/nae2.12056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.12056","url":null,"abstract":"A quick outline of any general manuscript often includes an introduction in which the purpose or multiple aims are outlined. Following the introduction is the background section where it is expected that the authors would explore the comparative literature and identify where the gap exists in knowledge information. The methodology and results sections follow. Then the most critical segment of any manuscript, the discussion section, is revealed. This can be the most creative section to a manuscript, and for some, the most difficult to write. The discussion segment of any manuscript requires more thought and effort than any other manuscript component.1 As a writing consultant, I have found that writing the discussion section can be the most challenging task, for most authors, novice or otherwise. The most demanding aspect of framing a discussion section is deciding which aspects of the study are the most critical.1 The discussion section addresses the significant findings and must ensure that the manuscript's purpose has been fully accomplished.2-5 If within the initial paragraphs of the discussion it is unclear to the reader or reviewer, what the key outcomes or findings are, the purpose is then left unfulfilled, and the direction of the discussion can be further misdirected. The purpose of this manuscript is to outline for the reader the critical components needed to successfully complete the discussion section within any manuscript. Watson states that the discussion section is the heart of the entire manuscript.6 It pulls together the purpose, methods, the key results and then interprets the relevance of the key findings for the reader. One way to successfully accomplish this is to restate the purpose of the study within the first two sentences of the opening paragraph within the discussion. Then, the key findings follow which will likely complete the stated purpose of the manuscript. For any discussion section, it is helpful to build on what has already been presented in the existing literature within the background section of the manuscript.7 The background section identifies where the gap is within the literature justifying the writing and research of the present manuscript. One way in which to enhance the writing of the discussion section for novice writers (and a likely indicator of success), is to follow the style or components outlined within other published works.8 Commonly noted errors within the discussion section include the following: (a) repeating the results section over again, (b) addressing findings which were almost significant and then discussing those findings as if they were critical, and (c) documenting conclusions without supporting evidence or clear results, that is, overplaying the significance of the findings.8 Additional errors can include: the significance of the results not being fully discussed or supported, presenting unsupported conclusions, or having study limitations being inadequately covered.8 Within the discus","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":"55 15","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135819554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Julee B. Waldrop, Jayne Jennings Dunlap, M. Kennedy
{"title":"Social media and journals: Suggested best practices for nursing editors, authors, readers","authors":"Julee B. Waldrop, Jayne Jennings Dunlap, M. Kennedy","doi":"10.1111/nae2.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.33","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47756050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Early career researchers: Will they perish before they publish?","authors":"Samantha Fien, Ashlyn Sahay, R. Watson, M. Cleary","doi":"10.1111/nae2.32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.32","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49559663","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Translation of research interviews: Do we have a problem with qualitative rigor?","authors":"L. Mckenna","doi":"10.1111/nae2.31","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.31","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47317373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Strategies for completing a successful integrative review","authors":"M. Oermann, K. Knafl","doi":"10.1111/nae2.30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.30","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43325365","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The traditional literature review","authors":"P. Chinn","doi":"10.1111/nae2.29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.29","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46464493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Heather D. Carter-Templeton, J. Wrigley, Jacqueline K. Owens, M. Oermann
{"title":"Digital object identifier: The DOI","authors":"Heather D. Carter-Templeton, J. Wrigley, Jacqueline K. Owens, M. Oermann","doi":"10.1111/nae2.25","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.25","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44490526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
R. Carpenter, Julee B. Waldrop, Heather D. Carter-Templeton
{"title":"Statistical, practical and clinical significance and Doctor of Nursing Practice projects","authors":"R. Carpenter, Julee B. Waldrop, Heather D. Carter-Templeton","doi":"10.1111/nae2.27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.27","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49405769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Published scholarship is a crucial expectation for faculty working in colleges and universities throughout the world. And, published scienti c literature is the way in which members of a discipline share their theories, research, and ndings to support knowledge used in practice. However, many academics identify perceived barriers to their lack of scholarly productivity. Lack of time to dedicate to writing as well as lack of experience in writing have been cited as obstacles to successful publication and scholarship. In addition, due to various forms of preparation to serve as a faculty member in nursing, some may not have had adequate education regarding the processes surrounding writing for scholarship. Therefore, many schools of nursing apply strategies such as writing groups, encouraging team writing, or other tactics to support faculty in their scholarship endeavors. Featured: Writing Productivity Strategies
{"title":"Writing productivity strategies","authors":"Heather D. Carter-Templeton","doi":"10.1111/nae2.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.20","url":null,"abstract":"Published scholarship is a crucial expectation for faculty working in colleges and universities throughout the world. And, published scienti c literature is the way in which members of a discipline share their theories, research, and ndings to support knowledge used in practice. However, many academics identify perceived barriers to their lack of scholarly productivity. Lack of time to dedicate to writing as well as lack of experience in writing have been cited as obstacles to successful publication and scholarship. In addition, due to various forms of preparation to serve as a faculty member in nursing, some may not have had adequate education regarding the processes surrounding writing for scholarship. Therefore, many schools of nursing apply strategies such as writing groups, encouraging team writing, or other tactics to support faculty in their scholarship endeavors. Featured: Writing Productivity Strategies","PeriodicalId":77290,"journal":{"name":"Nurse author & editor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/nae2.20","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43440252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：