M. Louise Fitzpatrick College of Nursing, Villanova University, Villanova, PA.
M. Louise Fitzpatrick College of Nursing, Villanova University, Villanova, PA.
Nurs Outlook. 2024 Jul-Aug;72(4):102179. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2024.102179. Epub 2024 May 15.
Educators are challenged to find better ways to prepare doctoral nursing students to conduct scholarly work involving human subjects.
To better understand doctoral nursing students' attitudes toward programmatic scholarly work and Institutional Review Board (IRB)/Quality Improvement Committee (QIC) education and submission processes.
Recent Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) and Philosophy of Nursing (PhD) graduates were recruited using convenience sampling techniques to participate in this cross-sectional, descriptive, mixed-methods pilot study. Data were collected using two researcher-developed instruments.
Nineteen doctoral nursing students participated in this study. Students most often used a quantitative approach with health care providers to complete their scholarly work requirements. Both PhD and DNP participants were overall satisfied with the IRB/QIC content in the curricula and the submission process. Four themes were identified: (a) Efficiency, (b) Collaboration, (c) Faculty Mentorship, and (d) Areas for Improvement.
Findings from this pilot study may be used to enhance IRB/QIC processes through revision of administrative processes and student education.
教育工作者面临着寻找更好的方法来培养博士护理学生进行涉及人类受试者的学术工作的挑战。
更好地了解博士护理学生对计划学术工作以及机构审查委员会 (IRB)/质量改进委员会 (QIC) 教育和提交过程的态度。
使用便利抽样技术招募了最近的护理实践博士 (DNP) 和护理哲学博士 (PhD) 毕业生，以参与这项横断面、描述性、混合方法试点研究。使用两个由研究人员开发的工具收集数据。
19 名博士护理学生参加了这项研究。学生们最常使用定量方法与医疗保健提供者一起完成他们的学术工作要求。无论是 PhD 还是 DNP 参与者，他们对课程中的 IRB/QIC 内容和提交过程总体上都很满意。确定了四个主题：(a) 效率，(b) 合作，(c) 教师指导，和 (d) 改进领域。
这项试点研究的结果可用于通过修改行政流程和学生教育来增强 IRB/QIC 流程。
