↓ Skip to main content

Ground-up-top down: a mixed method action research study aimed at normalising research in practice for nurses and midwives

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nursing, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Ground-up-top down: a mixed method action research study aimed at normalising research in practice for nurses and midwives
Published in
BMC Nursing, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12912-017-0249-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vicki Parker, Gena Lieschke, Michelle Giles

Abstract

Improving health, patient and system outcomes through a practice-based research agenda requires infrastructural supports, leadership and capacity building approaches, at both the individual and organisational levels. Embedding research as normal nursing and midwifery practice requires a flexible approach that is responsive to the diverse clinical contexts within which care is delivered and the variable research skills and interest of clinicians. This paper reports the study protocol for research being undertaken in a Local Health District (LHD) in New South Wales (NSW) Australia. The study aims to evaluate existing nursing and midwifery research activity, culture, capacity and capability across the LHD. This information, in addition to input from key stakeholders will be used to develop a responsive, productive and sustainable research capacity building framework aimed at enculturating practice-based research activities within and across diverse clinical settings of the LHD. A three-phased, sequential mixed-methods action research design underpinned by Normalization Process Theory (NPT). Participants will be nursing and midwifery clinicians and managers across rural and metropolitan services. A combination of survey, focus group, individual interviews and peer supported action-learning groups will be used to gather data. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive statistics, correlation and regression, together with thematic analysis of qualitative data to produce an integrated report. Understanding the current research activity and capacity of nurses and midwives, together with organisational supports and culture is essential to developing a productive and sustainable research environment. However, knowledge alone will not bring about change. This study will move beyond description of barriers to research participation for nurses and midwives and the promulgation of various capacity building frameworks to employ a theory driven action-oriented approach to normalisation of nursing and midwifery research practice. In doing so, our aim is to make possible the utilisation, generation and translation of practice based research that informs improved patient and service delivery outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 16%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 3%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 31 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 21 24%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Psychology 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 32 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,263,069
of 24,552,012 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nursing
#350
of 869 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,391
of 320,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nursing
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,552,012 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 869 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.