Dobrowolska Beata, Chruściel Paweł, Pilewska-Kozak Anna, Mianowana Violetta, Monist Marta, Palese Alvisa
Department of Holistic Care and Management in Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Medical University of Lublin, Staszica Str. 4-6, Lublin, Poland.
Department of Nursing Development, Faculty of Health Sciences, Medical University of Lublin, Staszica Str. 4-6, Lublin, Poland.
BMC Nurs. 2021 Nov 15;20(1):228. doi: 10.1186/s12912-021-00753-6.
This study aimed to map and summarise the state of the research regarding doctoral programs in nursing, as well as the issues debated in the context of nursing doctoral education. A Scoping Review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension scoping reviews statement (PRISMA-ScR) was conducted. Three electronic bibliographic data bases were searched: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Complete, Medline (on EBSCO Host) and SCOPUS to identify empirical studies published between January 2009 and December 2019. The review process was based on framework identified by Arksey and O'Malley and further revised by Levac and colleagues. Analysis was performed with the use of the Donabedian framework regarding the structure of the doctorate programmes, the process, and the outcomes.
The review included 41 articles, mostly originating in the United States (n=26) and Europe (n=8), mainly by collecting the perceptions of students and faculty members with descriptive studies. The following issues were investigated at the (a) structure level: Prerequisite for doctoral candidates, Qualifications of faculty members, Mission of doctoral programs; (b) process level: Doctoral programs contents, Doctoral programs resources and quality, Mentoring and supervision, Doing doctorate abroad; and (c) outcome level: Academic performance outcomes in doctoral programs, Doctoral graduates' competences, Doctoral students/graduates' satisfaction, Doctoral graduates' challenges.
Doctoral programs have mainly been investigated to date with descriptive studies, suggesting more robust research investigating the effectiveness of strategies to prepare future scientists in the nursing discipline. Doctorates are different across countries, and there is no visible cooperation of scholars internationally; their structure and processes have been reported to be stable over the years, thus not following the research development in nursing, discipline and practice expectations. Moreover, no clear framework of outcomes in the short- and long-term have been established to date to measure the quality and effectiveness of doctorate education. National and global strategies might establish common structure, process and outcome frameworks, as well as promote robust studies that are capable of assessing the effectiveness of this field of education.
本研究旨在梳理和总结护理博士项目的研究现状,以及护理博士教育背景下所讨论的问题。按照系统评价和Meta分析扩展范围综述声明(PRISMA-ScR)进行了一项范围综述。检索了三个电子文献数据库:护理及相关健康文献累积索引完整版、EBSCO主机上的Medline以及Scopus,以识别2009年1月至2019年12月期间发表的实证研究。综述过程基于Arksey和O'Malley确定并经Levac及其同事进一步修订的框架。使用Donabedian框架对博士项目的结构、过程和结果进行了分析。
该综述纳入了41篇文章,大多来自美国(n = 26)和欧洲(n = 8),主要是通过描述性研究收集学生和教师的看法。在以下方面进行了调查:(a)结构层面:博士候选人的先决条件、教师资质、博士项目的使命;(b)过程层面:博士项目内容、博士项目资源与质量、指导与监督、在国外攻读博士学位;以及(c)结果层面:博士项目中的学业成绩结果、博士毕业生的能力、博士生/毕业生的满意度、博士毕业生面临的挑战。
迄今为止,对博士项目的研究主要是描述性研究,这表明需要开展更有力的研究来调查培养护理领域未来科学家的策略的有效性。各国的博士项目存在差异,国际上学者之间没有明显的合作;多年来其结构和过程据报道较为稳定,因此没有跟上护理学科的研究发展以及实践期望。此外,迄今为止尚未建立明确的短期和长期结果框架来衡量博士教育的质量和有效性。国家和全球战略可能会建立共同的结构、过程和结果框架,并促进能够评估该教育领域有效性的有力研究。