PubMed · 10474365
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
T Beavan. 1998. 'Keep asking things' capturing clinical ideas.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10474365/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The purposes of this article are to present an overview of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and describe some of the methodological problems inherent in using RCTs in nursing research. Many nursing intervention studies are fraught with problems that defy the stringent control criteria required for RCTs, leading to biased estimates of intervention efficacy. Five threats to validity in RCTs are presented, including problems related to (a) differential dropout, (b) random assignment, (c) identifying and maintaining an adequate control condition, (d) nonadherence to research protocols, and (e) assessment of clinically meaningful change. Three strategies are recommended for addressing some of the problems posed by RCTs and improving inference.
While the benefits of collaborative research have been well documented, fewer publications exist regarding the complex, problematic issues involved in these undertakings. This paper offers an integrated collaborative research model to depict the complexities and challenges of initiation and implementation of a 2 1/2 year joint research project between a community hospital and a university school of nursing in Southern Ontario, Canada. A sampling of the experiences of the researchers are analyzed to clarify the dynamic and often competing issues and interactions involved in encouraging hospital-wide research involvement during periods of organizational growth and change. The model reflects the simultaneous interaction of organizational, change and collaborative processes while maintaining the rigor of the research (RCT), and ensuring minimal disruption to the service agency. Quantitative outcomes of this collaboration are presented through an analysis of participant involvement on multiple organizational levels. Recommendations for future collaborative research, including design and methodological issues and collaborative and change strategies are offered. The complexity of balancing the necessary trade-offs required of successful collaborative research are highlighted and will be useful to those considering and planning future collaborations.
Over the last two decades, the health care professions in the United Kingdom have seen an unparalleled expansion of continuing professional education (CPE) and development (CPD) programmes; however, there is little empirical evidence that these enhance the care delivered to patients. Further research is also needed to demonstrate that these initiatives are linked to improved patient outcomes. If health care educators are to move towards an 'evidence-based curriculum', some restructuring of courses may be needed. Priorities should be set and decisions made, based on the results of reliable and valid research into the clinical outcomes of CPE. To evaluate courses and demonstrate educational effectiveness solely in terms of student satisfaction is not enough; to survive in the world of evidence-based care, educators must also demonstrate their contribution to clinical effectiveness. However, the neoteric field of impact evaluation lacks not only validated research methods, but also an agreed agenda for future research. Drawing on interviews undertaken with nurses who have participated in education evaluations and the relevant literature, this paper discusses the available data collection instruments and the development of viable research designs and methods, which are urgently needed to assess the outcomes of professional education programmes.