Bond A Elaine, Eshah Nidal Farid, Bani-Khaled Mohammed, Hamad Atef Omar, Habashneh Samira, Kataua' Hussein, al-Jarrah Imad, Abu Kamal Andaleeb, Hamdan Falastine Rafic, Maabreh Roqia
Nursing PhD Program, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.
Scand J Caring Sci. 2011 Jun;25(2):404-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2010.00835.x. Epub 2010 Oct 18.
Since the early 1950s, nursing leaders have worked diligently to build the Scientific Discipline of Nursing, integrating Theory, Research and Practice. Recently, the role of theory has again come into question, with some scientists claiming nurses are not using theory to guide their research, with which to improve practice.
The purposes of this descriptive study were to determine: (i) Were nursing scientists' research articles in leading nursing journals based on theory? (ii) If so, were the theories nursing theories or borrowed theories? (iii) Were the theories integrated into the studies, or were they used as organizing frameworks?
Research articles from seven top ISI journals were analysed, excluding regularly featured columns, meta-analyses, secondary analysis, case studies and literature reviews. The authors used King's dynamic Interacting system and Goal Attainment Theory as an organizing framework. They developed consensus on how to identify the integration of theory, searching the Title, Abstract, Aims, Methods, Discussion and Conclusion sections of each research article, whether quantitative or qualitative.
Of 2857 articles published in the seven journals from 2002 to, and including, 2006, 2184 (76%) were research articles. Of the 837 (38%) authors who used theories, 460 (55%) used nursing theories, 377 (45%) used other theories: 776 (93%) of those who used theory integrated it into their studies, including qualitative studies, while 51 (7%) reported they used theory as an organizing framework for their studies. Closer analysis revealed theory principles were implicitly implied, even in research reports that did not explicitly report theory usage.
Increasing numbers of nursing research articles (though not percentagewise) continue to be guided by theory, and not always by nursing theory. Newer nursing research methods may not explicitly state the use of nursing theory, though it is implicitly implied.
自20世纪50年代初以来，护理领域的领导者们一直努力构建护理科学学科，将理论、研究和实践相结合。最近，理论的作用再次受到质疑，一些科学家声称护士没有使用理论来指导他们的研究，进而改善实践。
这项描述性研究的目的是确定：（i）护理科学家发表在主要护理期刊上的研究文章是否基于理论？（ii）如果是，这些理论是护理理论还是借用的理论？（iii）这些理论是融入了研究中，还是仅用作组织框架？
对来自七家顶级ISI期刊的研究文章进行分析，排除常规专栏文章、荟萃分析、二次分析、案例研究和文献综述。作者使用金氏动态互动系统和目标达成理论作为组织框架。他们就如何识别理论的融入达成共识，搜索每篇研究文章的标题、摘要、目的、方法、讨论和结论部分，无论其是定量研究还是定性研究。
在2002年至2006年（含）期间这七家期刊发表的2857篇文章中，2184篇（76%）为研究文章。在837位（38%）使用了理论的作者中，460位（55%）使用了护理理论，377位（45%）使用了其他理论：在使用理论的作者中，776位（93%）将其融入了研究中，包括定性研究，而51位（7%）报告称他们将理论用作研究的组织框架。进一步分析发现，即使在未明确报告理论使用情况的研究报告中，理论原则也有隐含体现。
越来越多的护理研究文章（尽管不是从百分比来看）继续受到理论的指导，而且并不总是受护理理论的指导。较新的护理研究方法可能不会明确说明护理理论的使用情况，尽管其有隐含体现。
