DeCoux Hampton Michelle, Chafetz Linda
Author Affiliations: Associate Professor and Doctor of Nursing Practice Program Coordinator (Dr Hampton), San Jose State University, California; and Professor Emeritus (Dr Chafetz), University of California, San Francisco.
Nurse Educ. 2021;46(3):164-169. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000883.
BACKGROUND/PROBLEM: Scientific writing skill development interventions in nursing are widely represented in the literature, but the specific skills required are poorly defined and measured.
This study used a cross-sectional, descriptive design to compare scientific writing skill assessment of doctor of nursing practice students' final project reports using 2 rubrics.
Of 13 skills, the strongest were: adherence to a standard structure, paraphrasing, and grammar, punctuation, and style. The weakest were: use of primary sources, concise, nonredundant presentation, and critical appraisal. Overall interrater agreement for the general essay writing rubric was 69.6%, and that for the scientific writing rubric was 82.3%.
Compared to the essay rubric, the scientific writing rubric was more useful for identifying skill strengths and weaknesses and improved interrater consistency.
背景/问题：护理领域科学写作技能发展干预措施在文献中广泛存在，但所需的具体技能定义和衡量都不明确。
本研究采用横断面描述性设计，使用两种评分标准比较护理实践博士学生最终项目报告的科学写作技能评估。
在13项技能中，最强的是：遵循标准结构、释义以及语法、标点和风格。最弱的是：使用原始资料、简洁无冗余表述以及批判性评价。一般论文写作评分标准的评分者间总体一致性为69.6%，科学写作评分标准的为82.3%。
与论文评分标准相比，科学写作评分标准在识别技能优势和劣势方面更有用，且提高了评分者间的一致性。
