有效性指标-揭示范围,稳健性和相关性的结果措施的评估护理和助产实践:文献综述

Andrée le May, Susan Williams
{"title":"有效性指标-揭示范围,稳健性和相关性的结果措施的评估护理和助产实践:文献综述","authors":"Andrée le May,&nbsp;Susan Williams","doi":"10.1016/j.cein.2006.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p><span>There are few collations of outcome measures used to evaluate UK nursing and midwifery practice. This paper makes a clear contribution to our existing knowledge by exposing the range and robustness of outcome measure available in the evaluation of nursing and midwifery practice. The review questions answered in this paper are:</span></p><ul><li><span>1)</span><span><p>what patient outcome measures have been used in studies of nursing and midwifery practice in the UK within the last decade?</p></span></li><li><span>2)</span><span><p>to what extent have the instruments been tested in the UK for validity and reliability with the respective patient populations?</p></span></li></ul><p>The review was conducted in 2002/3.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Conventional methods for systematic reviews guided this work. These included: 1) defining terms to be used in the review, 2) searching for published and grey literature relevant to the two review questions, 3) selecting studies from this literature that would help to answer the review questions, 4) appraising studies to further determine their rigor and appropriateness in answering the review questions and 5) synthesising the findings to enable a comprehensive view of outcome measures used to evaluate nursing and midwifery to be formed.</p></div><div><h3>Results and Conclusions</h3><p>This systematic review identified numerous patient outcome measures, across a range of specialisms, available for the assessment of nursing and midwifery practice in the UK. The review also highlighted the extent to which the instruments have been tested in the UK for validity and reliability and showed the need for further testing of new instruments. The development of qualitative tools, which may also be suited to the evaluation of nursing and midwifery practice both within the UK and the wider international arena, was identified as an area for future work.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":87580,"journal":{"name":"Clinical effectiveness in nursing","volume":"9 ","pages":"Pages e113-e131"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cein.2006.03.001","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Indicators of effectiveness – exposing the range, robustness and relevance of outcome measures for the evaluation of Nursing and Midwifery Practice: A literature review\",\"authors\":\"Andrée le May,&nbsp;Susan Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cein.2006.03.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p><span>There are few collations of outcome measures used to evaluate UK nursing and midwifery practice. This paper makes a clear contribution to our existing knowledge by exposing the range and robustness of outcome measure available in the evaluation of nursing and midwifery practice. The review questions answered in this paper are:</span></p><ul><li><span>1)</span><span><p>what patient outcome measures have been used in studies of nursing and midwifery practice in the UK within the last decade?</p></span></li><li><span>2)</span><span><p>to what extent have the instruments been tested in the UK for validity and reliability with the respective patient populations?</p></span></li></ul><p>The review was conducted in 2002/3.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Conventional methods for systematic reviews guided this work. These included: 1) defining terms to be used in the review, 2) searching for published and grey literature relevant to the two review questions, 3) selecting studies from this literature that would help to answer the review questions, 4) appraising studies to further determine their rigor and appropriateness in answering the review questions and 5) synthesising the findings to enable a comprehensive view of outcome measures used to evaluate nursing and midwifery to be formed.</p></div><div><h3>Results and Conclusions</h3><p>This systematic review identified numerous patient outcome measures, across a range of specialisms, available for the assessment of nursing and midwifery practice in the UK. The review also highlighted the extent to which the instruments have been tested in the UK for validity and reliability and showed the need for further testing of new instruments. The development of qualitative tools, which may also be suited to the evaluation of nursing and midwifery practice both within the UK and the wider international arena, was identified as an area for future work.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical effectiveness in nursing\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"Pages e113-e131\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cein.2006.03.001\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical effectiveness in nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361900406000227\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical effectiveness in nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361900406000227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

很少有结果测量的整理用于评估英国护理和助产实践。本文通过揭示护理和助产实践评估中可用的结果测量的范围和稳健性,对我们现有的知识做出了明确的贡献。本文回答的回顾问题是:1)在过去十年中,在英国的护理和助产实践研究中使用了哪些患者结果测量方法?2)在英国对各自患者群体的有效性和可靠性进行了多大程度的测试?检讨在2002/3年度进行。方法采用常规的系统评价方法。这些包括:1)定义综述中使用的术语,2)搜索与两个综述问题相关的已发表文献和灰色文献,3)从这些文献中选择有助于回答综述问题的研究,4)评估研究以进一步确定其回答综述问题的严密性和适当性,5)综合研究结果以形成用于评估护理和助产的结果测量的综合视图。结果和结论本系统综述确定了许多患者结果指标,涵盖了一系列专业,可用于评估英国的护理和助产实践。该审查还强调了这些仪器在英国进行有效性和可靠性测试的程度,并表明需要进一步测试新仪器。定性工具的发展,也可能适用于英国和更广泛的国际舞台上的护理和助产实践的评估,被确定为未来工作的一个领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Indicators of effectiveness – exposing the range, robustness and relevance of outcome measures for the evaluation of Nursing and Midwifery Practice: A literature review

Background

There are few collations of outcome measures used to evaluate UK nursing and midwifery practice. This paper makes a clear contribution to our existing knowledge by exposing the range and robustness of outcome measure available in the evaluation of nursing and midwifery practice. The review questions answered in this paper are:

  • 1)

    what patient outcome measures have been used in studies of nursing and midwifery practice in the UK within the last decade?

  • 2)

    to what extent have the instruments been tested in the UK for validity and reliability with the respective patient populations?

The review was conducted in 2002/3.

Methods

Conventional methods for systematic reviews guided this work. These included: 1) defining terms to be used in the review, 2) searching for published and grey literature relevant to the two review questions, 3) selecting studies from this literature that would help to answer the review questions, 4) appraising studies to further determine their rigor and appropriateness in answering the review questions and 5) synthesising the findings to enable a comprehensive view of outcome measures used to evaluate nursing and midwifery to be formed.

Results and Conclusions

This systematic review identified numerous patient outcome measures, across a range of specialisms, available for the assessment of nursing and midwifery practice in the UK. The review also highlighted the extent to which the instruments have been tested in the UK for validity and reliability and showed the need for further testing of new instruments. The development of qualitative tools, which may also be suited to the evaluation of nursing and midwifery practice both within the UK and the wider international arena, was identified as an area for future work.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Maternal psychosocial predictors of pediatric health care use: Use of the common sense model of health and illness behaviors to extend beyond the usual suspects Does excessive alcohol use in teenagers affect their everyday prospective memory? What is it like to use hip protectors? A qualitative study of the views and experiences of nurses and patients Evaluation of the nature of untoward clinical events in adult high dependency care
×
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