Contenuto dell'articolo principale
Abstract
INTRODUZIONE. La natura sistemica dell'assistenza infermieristica ha spinto i ricercatori infermieri a un utilizzo numericamente consistente di ricerche che necessitano di una metodologia qualitativa. Sebbene il tempi non troppo lontani la metodologia qualitativa sia stata considerata una ricerca non-scientifica, l'andamento ha mostrato una aumento sostanziale della sua produzione tra gli anni 1997 e 2000 per poi assestarsi negli anni successivi. Al crescente numero di pubblicazioni con disegno di tipo qualitativo è corrisposta la preoccupazione di verificare il rigore e la credibilití degli studi che utilizzano tale metodo. L'applicazione degli strumenti per la valutazione della qualití ha mostrato che la precisione metodologica degli studi con disegno qualitativo è cresciuta nel tempo.
SCOPO. Valutare, utilizzando lo strumento Critical Appraisal Skills Programme, la qualití degli studi qualitativi pubblicati negli ultimi cinque anni dalle riviste infermieristiche internazionali a maggiore Impact Factor.
METODO. Verranno individuati tutti gli articoli qualitativi pubblicati sulle dieci più autorevoli riviste infermieristiche che saranno sottoposti da due ricercatori in modo indipendente allo strumento del Critical Appraisal Skill Programme nella sua versione originale.
RISULTATI ATTESI. I risultati permetteranno di osservare se la ricerca qualitativa prodotta in ambito infermieristico utilizza una metodologia rigorosa nella stesura dei report, presupponendo che la qualití sia cresciuta in questi ultimi cinque anni rispetto agli anni precedenti.
CONCLUSIONI: Lo studio aiuterí i ricercatori a valutare quale livello abbiano raggiunto gli infermieri nello sviluppo della ricerca qualitativa.
PAROLE CHIAVE: ricerca infermieristica, bibliometria, ricerca qualitativa
___________
The evaluation of qualitative research published in nursing journals: protocol of a cross-sectional study
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION. The nature of nursing has prompted researchers nurses to use a large number of qualitative methodology research. The trend showed a substantial increase in its production between 1997 and 2000 to settle back down in the following years although until recently the qualitative methodology was considered a non-scientific research. The growing number of publications with qualitative design is paid concern to verify the rigor and credibility of studies using this method. The use of the quality assessment tools showed that the methodological precision of studies with a qualitative design has grown over time.
AIM. Assessing, using the tool Critical Appraisal Skills Programme, the quality of qualitative studies published in the last five years by international nursing journals with higher impact factor.
METHOD. We will search the qualitative articles published on the ten most influential nursing journals that will be submitted by two independent researchers at the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool in its original version.
EXPECTED RESULTS. The results make it possible to observe whether the qualitative research produced in the field of nursing uses a rigorous methodology in the drafting of the report, assuming that the quality has grown in the past five years than in previous years.
CONCLUSION. The study will help researchers assess which level reached nurses in the development of qualitative research.
KEY WORDS: bibliometrics, nursing research, qualitative research
Dettagli dell'articolo
Riferimenti
- Bailey, C., Froggatt, K., Field, D., & Krishnasamy, M.
- (2002). The nursing contribution to qualitative
- research in palliative care 1990-1999: a critical
- evaluation. Journal Advanced Nursing, 40(1), 48-60.
- Borreani, C., Miccinesi, G., Brunelli, C., & Lina, M.
- (2004). An increasing number of qualitative
- research papers in oncology and palliative care:
- does it mean a thorough development of the
- methodology of research? Health Qual Life
- Outcomes., 2, 7.
- Bradley, P., & Burls, A.J. (1999). Critical Appraisal
- Skills Programme: A project in critical appraisal
- skills teaching to improve the quality in health
- care. Journal of Clinical Governance, 7(2), 88-91.
- Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP),
- Qualitative Research Checklist 31.05.13, Critical
- Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP), Oxford, UK,
- , data accesso 11 novembre 2016 da
- h t t p : / / w w w . c a s p - u k . n e t / w p -
- content/uploads/2011/11/CASP-Qualitative-
- Research-Checklist-31.05.13.pdf.
- Gagliardi, A. R., & Dobrow, M. J. (2011). Paucity of
- qualitative research in general medical and health
- services and policy research journals: analysis of
- publication rates. BMC Health Serv Res., 11:268.
- Gagliardi, A. R., Umoquit, M., Webster, F., & Dobrow,
- M. (2014). Qualitative research publication rates
- in top-ranked nursing journals: 2002-2011. Nurs
- Res., 63(3), 221-227.
- Hoddinott, P., & Pill, R. (1997). A review of recently
- published qualitative research in general practice.
- More methodological questions than answers? Fam
- Pract., 14(4), 313-319.
- Hoff, T. J., & Witt, L. C. (2000). Exploring the use of
- qualitative methods in published health services
- and management research. Med Care Res Rev.,
- (2), 139-160.
- Horsburgh, D. (2003). Evaluation of qualitative
- research. J Clin Nurs., 12(2), 307-312.
- Huntley, A. L., King, A. J., Moore, T. H., Paterson, C.,
- Persad, R., Sharp, D., & Evans, M. (2017).
- Methodological exemplar of integrating
- quantitative and qualitative evidence - supportive
- care for men with prostate cancer: what are the
- most important components? J Adv Nurs., 73(1),
- -20.
- Lipscomb, M. (2012). Questioning the use value of
- qualitative research findings. Nurs Philos., 13(2),
- -125.
- Masood, M., Thaliath, E. T., Bower, E. J., & Newton,
- J. T. (2011). An appraisal of the quality of
- published qualitative dental research. Community
- Dent Oral Epidemiol., 39(3), 193-203.
- McKibbon, K. A., & Gadd, C. S. (2004). A
- quantitative analysis of qualitative studies in
- clinical journals for the 2000 publishing year.
- BMC Med Inform Decis Mak., 4, 11Miller, W. R. (2010). Qualitative research findings as
- evidence: utility in nursing practice. Clin Nurse
- Spec., 24(4), 191-193.
- Sasso, L., Bagnasco, A., & Ghirotto, L. (2015). La
- ricerca qualitativa: una risorsa per i professionisti
- della salute. Milano: Edra editore.
- Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., & Dillon, L. (2003).
- Quality in Qualitative Evaluation: A Framework for
- Assessing Research Evidence. London: Government
- Chief Social Researcher's Office, 5–21.
- Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports. Data
- accesso 15 ottobre 2016, da: http//ipscience.
- thomsonreuters.com/.
- Weiner, B. J., Amick, H. R., Lund, J. L., Lee, S. Y., &
- Hoff, T. J. (2011). Use of qualitative methods in
- published health services and management
- research: a 10-year review. Med Care Res Rev.,
- (1), 3-33
Riferimenti
Bailey, C., Froggatt, K., Field, D., & Krishnasamy, M.
(2002). The nursing contribution to qualitative
research in palliative care 1990-1999: a critical
evaluation. Journal Advanced Nursing, 40(1), 48-60.
Borreani, C., Miccinesi, G., Brunelli, C., & Lina, M.
(2004). An increasing number of qualitative
research papers in oncology and palliative care:
does it mean a thorough development of the
methodology of research? Health Qual Life
Outcomes., 2, 7.
Bradley, P., & Burls, A.J. (1999). Critical Appraisal
Skills Programme: A project in critical appraisal
skills teaching to improve the quality in health
care. Journal of Clinical Governance, 7(2), 88-91.
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP),
Qualitative Research Checklist 31.05.13, Critical
Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP), Oxford, UK,
, data accesso 11 novembre 2016 da
h t t p : / / w w w . c a s p - u k . n e t / w p -
content/uploads/2011/11/CASP-Qualitative-
Research-Checklist-31.05.13.pdf.
Gagliardi, A. R., & Dobrow, M. J. (2011). Paucity of
qualitative research in general medical and health
services and policy research journals: analysis of
publication rates. BMC Health Serv Res., 11:268.
Gagliardi, A. R., Umoquit, M., Webster, F., & Dobrow,
M. (2014). Qualitative research publication rates
in top-ranked nursing journals: 2002-2011. Nurs
Res., 63(3), 221-227.
Hoddinott, P., & Pill, R. (1997). A review of recently
published qualitative research in general practice.
More methodological questions than answers? Fam
Pract., 14(4), 313-319.
Hoff, T. J., & Witt, L. C. (2000). Exploring the use of
qualitative methods in published health services
and management research. Med Care Res Rev.,
(2), 139-160.
Horsburgh, D. (2003). Evaluation of qualitative
research. J Clin Nurs., 12(2), 307-312.
Huntley, A. L., King, A. J., Moore, T. H., Paterson, C.,
Persad, R., Sharp, D., & Evans, M. (2017).
Methodological exemplar of integrating
quantitative and qualitative evidence - supportive
care for men with prostate cancer: what are the
most important components? J Adv Nurs., 73(1),
-20.
Lipscomb, M. (2012). Questioning the use value of
qualitative research findings. Nurs Philos., 13(2),
-125.
Masood, M., Thaliath, E. T., Bower, E. J., & Newton,
J. T. (2011). An appraisal of the quality of
published qualitative dental research. Community
Dent Oral Epidemiol., 39(3), 193-203.
McKibbon, K. A., & Gadd, C. S. (2004). A
quantitative analysis of qualitative studies in
clinical journals for the 2000 publishing year.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak., 4, 11Miller, W. R. (2010). Qualitative research findings as
evidence: utility in nursing practice. Clin Nurse
Spec., 24(4), 191-193.
Sasso, L., Bagnasco, A., & Ghirotto, L. (2015). La
ricerca qualitativa: una risorsa per i professionisti
della salute. Milano: Edra editore.
Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., & Dillon, L. (2003).
Quality in Qualitative Evaluation: A Framework for
Assessing Research Evidence. London: Government
Chief Social Researcher's Office, 5–21.
Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports. Data
accesso 15 ottobre 2016, da: http//ipscience.
thomsonreuters.com/.
Weiner, B. J., Amick, H. R., Lund, J. L., Lee, S. Y., &
Hoff, T. J. (2011). Use of qualitative methods in
published health services and management
research: a 10-year review. Med Care Res Rev.,
(1), 3-33