Abstract
This study compared the conceptual foci and methodological characteristics of research projects which tested the effects of nursing interventions, published in four general nursing research journals with predominantly North American, and two with predominantly European/International authorship and readership. Dimensions and variables of comparison included: nature of subjects, design issues, statistical methodology, statistical power, and types of interventions and outcomes. Although some differences emerged, the most striking and consistent finding was that there were no statistically significant differences (and thus similarities) in the content foci and methodological parameters of the intervention studies published in both groups of journals. We conclude that European/International and North American nursing intervention studies, as reported in major general nursing research journals, are highly similar in the parameters studied, yet in need of overall improvement. Certainly, there is no empirical support for the common (explicit or implicit).
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 173-187 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | International Journal of Nursing Studies |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1995 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Nursing(all)
- Medicine(all)
- Health(social science)
Cite this
Conditions, interventions, and outcomes in nursing research : a comparative analysis of North American and European/ International journals (1981-1990). / Abraham, Ivo L; Chalifoux, Zona L.; Evers, Georges C M; De Geest, Sabina.
In: International Journal of Nursing Studies, Vol. 32, No. 2, 1995, p. 173-187.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Conditions, interventions, and outcomes in nursing research
T2 - a comparative analysis of North American and European/ International journals (1981-1990)
AU - Abraham, Ivo L
AU - Chalifoux, Zona L.
AU - Evers, Georges C M
AU - De Geest, Sabina
PY - 1995
Y1 - 1995
N2 - This study compared the conceptual foci and methodological characteristics of research projects which tested the effects of nursing interventions, published in four general nursing research journals with predominantly North American, and two with predominantly European/International authorship and readership. Dimensions and variables of comparison included: nature of subjects, design issues, statistical methodology, statistical power, and types of interventions and outcomes. Although some differences emerged, the most striking and consistent finding was that there were no statistically significant differences (and thus similarities) in the content foci and methodological parameters of the intervention studies published in both groups of journals. We conclude that European/International and North American nursing intervention studies, as reported in major general nursing research journals, are highly similar in the parameters studied, yet in need of overall improvement. Certainly, there is no empirical support for the common (explicit or implicit).
AB - This study compared the conceptual foci and methodological characteristics of research projects which tested the effects of nursing interventions, published in four general nursing research journals with predominantly North American, and two with predominantly European/International authorship and readership. Dimensions and variables of comparison included: nature of subjects, design issues, statistical methodology, statistical power, and types of interventions and outcomes. Although some differences emerged, the most striking and consistent finding was that there were no statistically significant differences (and thus similarities) in the content foci and methodological parameters of the intervention studies published in both groups of journals. We conclude that European/International and North American nursing intervention studies, as reported in major general nursing research journals, are highly similar in the parameters studied, yet in need of overall improvement. Certainly, there is no empirical support for the common (explicit or implicit).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029281101&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029281101&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0020-7489(94)00030-N
DO - 10.1016/0020-7489(94)00030-N
M3 - Article
C2 - 7790157
AN - SCOPUS:0029281101
VL - 32
SP - 173
EP - 187
JO - International Journal of Nursing Studies
JF - International Journal of Nursing Studies
SN - 0020-7489
IS - 2
ER -