Sherry A. Burrell PhD, RN, CNE , Amy McKeever PhD, CRNP, WHNP , Debra Shearer EdD, FNP-BC, PMHNP-BC , Sinéad Hahessy RGN, MA , Emily Battaglia MSN, RN
{"title":"博士毕业生对学术工作以及机构审查委员会和质量改进委员会的教育和提交流程的态度：试点研究","authors":"Sherry A. Burrell PhD, RN, CNE , Amy McKeever PhD, CRNP, WHNP , Debra Shearer EdD, FNP-BC, PMHNP-BC , Sinéad Hahessy RGN, MA , Emily Battaglia MSN, RN","doi":"10.1016/j.outlook.2024.102179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Educators are challenged to find better ways to prepare doctoral nursing students to conduct scholarly work involving human subjects.</p></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To better understand doctoral nursing students’ attitudes toward programmatic scholarly work and Institutional Review Board (IRB)/Quality Improvement Committee (QIC) education and submission processes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Recent Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) and Philosophy of Nursing (PhD) graduates were recruited using convenience sampling techniques to participate in this cross-sectional, descriptive, mixed-methods pilot study. Data were collected using two researcher-developed instruments.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Nineteen doctoral nursing students participated in this study. Students most often used a quantitative approach with health care providers to complete their scholarly work requirements. Both PhD and DNP participants were overall satisfied with the IRB/QIC content in the curricula and the submission process. Four themes were identified: (a) <em>Efficiency</em>, (b) <em>Collaboration</em>, (c) <em>Faculty Mentorship</em>, and (d) <em>Areas for Improvement</em>.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Findings from this pilot study may be used to enhance IRB/QIC processes through revision of administrative processes and student education.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54705,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Outlook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Doctoral graduates’ attitudes toward scholarly work and Institutional Review Board and Quality Improvement Committee education and submission processes: A pilot study\",\"authors\":\"Sherry A. Burrell PhD, RN, CNE , Amy McKeever PhD, CRNP, WHNP , Debra Shearer EdD, FNP-BC, PMHNP-BC , Sinéad Hahessy RGN, MA , Emily Battaglia MSN, RN\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.outlook.2024.102179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Educators are challenged to find better ways to prepare doctoral nursing students to conduct scholarly work involving human subjects.</p></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To better understand doctoral nursing students’ attitudes toward programmatic scholarly work and Institutional Review Board (IRB)/Quality Improvement Committee (QIC) education and submission processes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Recent Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) and Philosophy of Nursing (PhD) graduates were recruited using convenience sampling techniques to participate in this cross-sectional, descriptive, mixed-methods pilot study. Data were collected using two researcher-developed instruments.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Nineteen doctoral nursing students participated in this study. Students most often used a quantitative approach with health care providers to complete their scholarly work requirements. Both PhD and DNP participants were overall satisfied with the IRB/QIC content in the curricula and the submission process. Four themes were identified: (a) <em>Efficiency</em>, (b) <em>Collaboration</em>, (c) <em>Faculty Mentorship</em>, and (d) <em>Areas for Improvement</em>.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Findings from this pilot study may be used to enhance IRB/QIC processes through revision of administrative processes and student education.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54705,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nursing Outlook\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nursing Outlook\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0029655424000721\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Outlook","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0029655424000721","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Doctoral graduates’ attitudes toward scholarly work and Institutional Review Board and Quality Improvement Committee education and submission processes: A pilot study
Background
Educators are challenged to find better ways to prepare doctoral nursing students to conduct scholarly work involving human subjects.
Purpose
To better understand doctoral nursing students’ attitudes toward programmatic scholarly work and Institutional Review Board (IRB)/Quality Improvement Committee (QIC) education and submission processes.
Methods
Recent Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) and Philosophy of Nursing (PhD) graduates were recruited using convenience sampling techniques to participate in this cross-sectional, descriptive, mixed-methods pilot study. Data were collected using two researcher-developed instruments.
Discussion
Nineteen doctoral nursing students participated in this study. Students most often used a quantitative approach with health care providers to complete their scholarly work requirements. Both PhD and DNP participants were overall satisfied with the IRB/QIC content in the curricula and the submission process. Four themes were identified: (a) Efficiency, (b) Collaboration, (c) Faculty Mentorship, and (d) Areas for Improvement.
Conclusion
Findings from this pilot study may be used to enhance IRB/QIC processes through revision of administrative processes and student education.
期刊介绍：
Nursing Outlook, a bimonthly journal, provides innovative ideas for nursing leaders through peer-reviewed articles and timely reports. Each issue examines current issues and trends in nursing practice, education, and research, offering progressive solutions to the challenges facing the profession. Nursing Outlook is the official journal of the American Academy of Nursing and the Council for the Advancement of Nursing Science and supports their mission to serve the public and the nursing profession by advancing health policy and practice through the generation, synthesis, and dissemination of nursing knowledge. The journal is included in MEDLINE, CINAHL and the Journal Citation Reports published by Clarivate Analytics.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
