德尔菲研究确立神经科学护理研究重点。

J Neurosci Nurs. 2022 Apr 1;54(2):74-79. doi: 10.1097/JNN.0000000000000637.

BACKGROUND

Establishing research priorities is essential not only to support evidence-based nursing practice but also to direct research agendas for nursing organizations such as the American Association of Neuroscience Nursing. METHODS: A 6-member Research Agenda Task Force selected potential research priorities based on a literature search of neuroscience nursing research. Using a 2-round, modified Delphi methodology, electronic surveys were distributed to 53 neuroscience nursing experts to gain consensus on the research priorities for neuroscience nursing. Survey data included demographics, agreement with selected gaps in neuroscience nursing research, and impact of selected neuroscience nursing research topics on the field. RESULTS: Twenty-six of 53 experts (49% response rate) participated in round 1, and 30 of 53 experts (57% response rate) participated in round 2. In round 1, the Research Agenda Task Force members revised the list of gaps in neuroscience nursing research to include only the top 39 ranked topics with greater than or equal to 73% agreement, created a new category "Professional Practice Issues," and added 1 additional topic. In round 2, 14 topics were ranked greater than or equal to 70% impactful and identified as the top neuroscience nursing research priorities. CONCLUSION: The results of this study served as an effort for creating research priorities and enhancing research collaboration that focuses on neuroscience nursing. Focusing on gaps in the literature and setting research priorities can ultimately improve patient outcomes. Neuroscience nursing research priorities can be used to inform, guide, and aid nurse scientists, educators, and providers, and to inform agencies that provide research and program funding.

背景

制定研究重点不仅对支持基于证据的护理实践至关重要，而且对美国神经科学护理协会等护理组织的研究议程也至关重要。

方法

一个由 6 名成员组成的研究议程工作组根据神经科学护理研究的文献检索，选择了潜在的研究重点。使用两轮修改后的德尔菲法，向 53 名神经科学护理专家发送电子调查，以就神经科学护理的研究重点达成共识。调查数据包括人口统计学信息、对神经科学护理研究中的差距的认同程度，以及选定的神经科学护理研究主题对该领域的影响。

结果

53 名专家中有 26 名（49%的回复率）参加了第一轮，53 名专家中有 30 名（57%的回复率）参加了第二轮。在第一轮中，研究议程工作组成员修改了神经科学护理研究差距清单，只包括排名前 39 位、认同度大于或等于 73%的主题，创建了一个新的“专业实践问题”类别，并增加了 1 个主题。在第二轮中，有 14 个主题被评为具有大于或等于 70%的影响力，被确定为神经科学护理的首要研究重点。